Skip to main content Skip to navigation

3: Assessment and Examinations

In this section of the Handbook, we will provide information about the assessment methods used throughout the Degree programme, as well as the various policies and procedures that are in place. You can find details of all policies relating to Assessment and Feedback on the Department's Assessment and Feedback webpagesLink opens in a new window. In particular, here you will find a link to the Department's Assessment Strategy.

You will experience a range of assessment methods, including mid-term tests, problem sets, presentations, essays and year-end exams during your Diploma. Any work that contributes towards the final module mark is known as summative assessment. However, for work during the year, you will also receive comments on it and this is part of the formative feedback that we provide.

Coursework

These rules and procedures relate to all undergraduate courses taught by the Department of Economics. You must pay particular attention to the paragraphs Referencing (3.1.7) and Plagiarism (3.1.8) and are strongly advised to read Regulation 11Link opens in a new window in the University of Warwick Calendar: www.warwick.ac.uk/services/gov/calendar/section2/regulations/cheatingLink opens in a new window.

Marking criteria

Performance is classified into five broad categories of: First; Upper Second (2.1); Lower Second (2.2); Third; Fail. There is a range of marks for each of the classes and the marking criteria are provided in the table below:

Class (Marks)ComprehensionAnalysisCritiquePresentation
FirstDemonstrates command of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents a tightly-focused, relevant and well-structured answer with full and accurate development of concepts/theories, and excellent use of evidence.Understands and evaluates relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations in a manner that demonstrates a developed capacity for independent thought. This may amount to an extension of existing arguments, debates and /or interpretations.Provides a thorough and consistent deployment of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
2:1Demonstrates good appreciation of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents a coherent and closely-argued answer with good structure, accurate use of concepts/theories, and good use of evidence.Understands and evaluates relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations in a manner that demonstrates a capacity for independent thought.Provides a good deployment of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
2:2Demonstrates an understanding of core aspects of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents an answer to the question taking into account appropriate structure, development of concepts/theories and reasonable use of evidence.Understands and reproduces relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations.Acknowledges and employs techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
ThirdDemonstrates some familiarity with the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship issues.Shows an understanding of the question with some structure, knowledge of concepts/theories and use of evidence.Demonstrates some awareness of relevant arguments, debates, and/or interpretations.Shows awareness of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
FailDemonstrates little evidence of familiarity with the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Demonstrates a poor grasp of the question with loose structure, little knowledge of concepts/theories and inadequate use of evidence.Demonstrates little awareness of relevant arguments, debates, and/or interpretations.Provides a poor demonstration of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.

The 20-point scale

The 20-point scale is a university-wide marking scale that maps the five broad class categories into a 20-point marking scale, as set out in the table below.

These procedures do not apply to quantitative problems or short-answer questions, which are marked using the whole range of marks between zero and 100. The 20-point marking scale applies to essay-type questions (both coursework and examination).

For example, an essay which is deemed to be an Upper Second class piece of work may be awarded only the mark of 62 or 65 or 68 within the range 60 to 69, according to whether the work is judged to be of low, medium or high worth, respectively, within the corresponding class. One of the motivations for the scale is to encourage essay markers to use higher marks within the first class range and lower marks in the fail range.

For those modules in which the examination paper is made up of a combination of essay-type questions and quantitative problems or short-answer questions, the 20-point scale is relevant only for the essay elements. The final mark will continue to emerge as an aggregation of individual marks, where these individual marks have been obtained in different ways. Note that this means that the aggregate mark itself is not constrained to be one of the 20 marks on the scale.

ClassScaleMarkDescriptor
FirstExcellent 1st100
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 1st88


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.

Upper Mid 1st82
Lower Mid 1st78
Low 1st74
Upper Second (2.1)High 2:168


High quality work demonstrating good knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.

Mid 2:165
Low 2:162
Lower SecondHigh 2:258


Competent work, demonstrating reasonable knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.

Mid 2:255
Low 2:252
ThirdHigh 3rd48


Work of limited quality, demonstrating some relevant knowledge and understanding.

Mid 3rd45
Low 3rd

42

FailHigh Fail (sub Honours)38Work 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.
Fail32Work 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.
25Poor quality work well below the standards required for the appropriate stage of an Honours Degree.
Low Fail12
ZeroZero0Work of no merit OR Absent; work not submitted; penalty in some misconduct cases.

Methods of submission

Please note that most modules will require submission of assessment by e-submission and this is done via Tabula. This year, due to COVID-19, no modules will require a paper copy to be submitted. It is your responsibility to make sure you check the module webpage and/or with the module leader about the submission arrangements for each module.

e-submission

A large amount of your coursework will be submitted and marked electronically and the Department uses Tabula for e-submissions, for recording your marks and for providing you with feedback. If you are granted an extension it will also appear on Tabula. You are asked to read the guidance on the e-submission system carefully before using it.

It is your responsibility to check that you are submitting the correct document to the correct module assignment and you are asked to check your assignment before finally submitting. If you do submit the wrong assignment, you are able to re-submit the correct one, but you will receive the normal late submission penalty if the correct assignment is submitted after the deadline.

You can submit your work electronically up until 12 noon on the deadline day and all work is date-and time-coded. Penalties will be applied to work submitted after this time. You are strongly encouraged to complete e-submission prior to 11:00 on the day of the deadline in order that you can inform us of any problems that may arise. The system can become very busy just before a deadline and neither this, nor computer difficulties will be accepted as a reason for late submission.

If you are submitting assessed coursework to other departments, you should familiarise yourself with that department’s particular submission deadlines and methods, as these may differ to those in the Department of Economics.

All electronically submitted work is marked online and feedback on this assessed work will also be provided via Tabula. You will receive a notification when your feedback is available to download on Tabula.

e-submission guidance

As most of your work will be submitted electronically, there are some key points to follow to ensure you don't make a mistake:

  1. You should ensure that your document includes your student I.D. number, but not your name, as all marking is done anonymously. You must also include the final word count.
  2. The assignment must be a 100% electronic submission and so any object such as graphs, figures or equations will have to be incorporated into your electronic document.
  3. To submit your document online, once you have produced your final electronic file as e.g. a Word document, you will need to create a PDF document from that Word document. To create a PDF document you can download a copy of the free software PDF converter from ITS (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/its/servicessupport/software/pdfconverterLink opens in a new window) and follow the instructions.
  4. Name the resultant PDF file as follows: module code-assignment number.pdf. For example, ec208-a1.pdf would be the name for your first assignment for EC208-Industrial Economics 1. ec307-a2.pdf would be the name for your second assignment for EC307- Macroeconomic Policy in the UK.
  5. Check the final document before uploading to ensure it has been converted accurately.
  6. Double check you are submitting the correct document and that you are submitting it to the correct module/assessment.
  7. If you submit more than one document for your assignment these must be submitted simultaneously.
  8. Upload the PDF via Tabula. If you have a technical problem with your submission then you should print off the error page and then email the PDF submission and error page to economics.ugoffice@warwick.ac.ukLink opens in a new window. However, given that you should have left enough time to resolve any difficulties, this will not be accepted as an excuse for a late submission.

Deadlines

Each piece of work must be submitted by a particular date, as set by the UG Office and approved by the module leader. You will be given notice of these deadlines. The University’s guidance to markers specifies a minimum of four term-time weeks’ notice of deadlines. It is your responsibility to arrange your own schedule and manage your time accordingly. We advise you always to leave a safety margin in case of last-minute difficulties in obtaining books, printing files, computer issues and so on. Aim to submit the piece of work a day or more before the final deadline and if it is a piece of group work, double check with your group members that it has been submitted. No reduction in late penalties will be made if you find you cannot upload the material before the deadline or if you thought that another member of your group was supposed to upload the work. It is your responsibility to ensure all work is submitted within the deadline. Also bear in mind that demand on the system is likely to be high in the last hours before the final deadline. Assessment deadlines for the academic year 2020-21 can be accessed through Tabula.

Late submission

If you submit work after the deadline, your work will be marked subject to a penalty in the form of a deduction of percentage points from the awarded mark. You will receive a five percentage point (marks) deduction per day (excluding Saturdays and Sundays, Bank Holidays and University closure days) thereafter, with a minimum mark for that assessment of zero.

The following table shows how the penalty system works (penalties are given in percentage points):

Day/Time SubmittedSubmission Deadline
 MonTuesWedsThursFri
After deadline Mon and Before deadline Tues5    
After deadline Tues and Before deadline Weds105   
After deadline Weds and Before deadline Thurs15105  
After deadline Thurs and Before deadline Fri2015105 
After deadline Fri and Before deadline successive Mon252015105
After deadline Mon and Before deadline successive Tues252015105
After deadline Tues and Before deadline successive Weds3025201510
After deadline Weds and Before deadline successive Thurs3530252015
After deadline Thurs and Before deadline successive Fri4035302520
With a further five points for each day, excluding weekends

For work that is submitted electronically, do not leave it too close to the last minute. Penalties cannot be removed in situations where the network was busy around the time of the submission deadline. You must also check your submitted work as invited to do so when e-submitting. If you initially submit the wrong document and either you or the marker identifies this, you can still submit the correct one, but a late penalty will be applied as detailed above. Penalties cannot be adjusted if you or we later find that you have submitted a wrong file or a corrupted document. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are submitting the correct assignment to the correct link by the deadline.

For problem sets, where solutions are discussed in module Support and Feedback classes immediately after submission, any late submissions will receive a mark of zero.

Extensions and exemptions

If you submit work after the deadline, your work will be marked subject to a penalty and if you miss a mid-term test or final examination, you will be given a mark of zero in that assessment. However, during the year there may be times when you are unwell and this might occur in close proximity to assessment deadlines or on the day of a test or examination.

In order to receive an extension to an assignment or an exemption from a test or assignment, you will need to submit evidence to the Department. Even if you are taking a module that is offered by a different academic department, it is still your home department (Economics) which makes the decision on an extension or an exemption.

Extension requests should be made via tabula by going to the relevant assessment link and from there you will be able to upload the relevant medical evidence. In all other cases (class/test/examination absences), mitigating circumstances evidence should be submitted via the personal circumstances portal in tabula. Further details regarding mitigating circumstances for examinations are given in section 3.2.6Link opens in a new window. Some Departments may have their own form for an extension or exemption, which might need signing by the Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer, once you have submitted evidence.

All extension and exemption requests are considered by the Wellbeing Officer, in consultation with the Director of Undergraduate Studies and not by your lecturer, class tutor or personal tutor. If you are thinking of asking for an extension or exemption, you should first ask yourself whether you could have reasonably foreseen the reason for your late submission or absence and taken avoiding action. If so, in fairness to those students in similar situations who took the necessary steps or precautions, your request is unlikely to be granted.

All applications and evidence are considered against the twin criteria of force majeure and evidence. If your request is necessitated by factors over which you have no control, and which you could not have reasonably anticipated (force majeure), and if these factors can be documented in some way, your request will normally be approved. Extensions or exemptions may be granted on compassionate grounds, e.g. death or serious illness in your immediate family. Evidence that is in any other language than English must be accompanied by an official translation.

All evidence must be submitted in a timely manner, which means within one week of the deadline or date of the assessment. If the assessment is worth less than 10% and your illness is of a short duration, you can submit a self-certification. It must be submitted within 3 days. Only two self-certifications are permitted each academic year and they are closely monitored. For any assessment worth more than 10%, official documentation is required. It is your responsibility to ensure that you upload the evidence and submit the form within one week of the date of the absence. We will not chase you for the evidence and if you do not provide it or it is insufficient and doesn't confirm the dates you are claiming for, your absence will not be condoned.

Extensions

If an extension is granted, a new deadline will be set by the Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer. Submission of work after this new deadline will be subject to the normal late submission penalties.

Any requests for extensions should be made in a timely manner and ideally before the deadline. However, extensions can be applied retroactively, lifting any late penalty you might have already received for that assessment. Should there be an unexplained delay of more than one week before submitting medical evidence, we may not be able to agree to your extension request. Bear in mind that your request will not be the only one coming in, especially during periods of numerous submissions deadlines. Please allow reasonable time for the situation to be resolved before contacting the UG office.

For assessments that are spread over a long period of time, such as dissertations or coursework, there is an expectation that almost every student will encounter some difficulties in their lives during this period. As a result, it is anticipated that you will handle these situations without impacting on your final submission. Thus, low-level and short-term illnesses and factors such as problems with computers, will not be considered as a basis for an extension for this type of work. This differs from assessments which have a shorter time to complete. For problem sets, where solutions are discussed in module Support and Feedback classes immediately after submission, no extensions can be granted, but you may be condoned from the assessment, based on the evidence. The weighting would normally be passed onto the final examination. Information on solution availability can be obtained from module leaders.

Regularly refused reasons for extensions

If you are thinking of applying for a coursework extension or exemption from a test, you should be aware that, if your reason is the same or similar to those given below, your request is likely to be refused.

"I travelled abroad over the vacation and was unable to obtain references from local libraries."

Comment: The University doesn’t require you to do academic work in the vacation. It may be a good thing if you do, but some students have to undertake paid employment. You could, and in this case should, have at least completed your research for the essay in term time.

"I travelled abroad over the vacation and as a result I returned late to the University or I had a poor internet connection whilst abroad."

Comment: The University requires you to be in residence in term time, and most assessments are submitted electronically. If you are concerned about poor internet connection you need to check before travelling whether this will be an issue.

"I have a last-minute invitation to an important job interview for which I need to prepare a presentation."

Comment: You knew you’d applied for the job, and building in some slack for interviews is just part of normal time management. You should plan to research and write assessed coursework with a margin to spare so that complications like this, which are predictable, don’t put you into a spin. However, your request will be viewed sympathetically if you get several last-minute invitations to interviews in quick succession. If the interview or assessment centre falls on the day of a test and you have evidence that this event cannot be moved, we may be able to consider an exemption request.

"I had too many other important things going on and forgot to submit my essay on the right day, but my file is dated the day before the deadline, proving that my essay was ready beforehand."

Comment: You have to give the right degree of priority to your academic work. The date on a file is easily manipulated.

"I was about to submit my essay on the day of the deadline when my computer crashed/was stolen, meaning I could not access e-submission website/access my file to upload."

Comment: Don't leave essential tasks to the last minute; please leave plenty of time to upload your work via e-submission, leaving a margin of error in case of technical difficulties. Always make regular backup copies of files both physically, such as on a memory stick, and using online facilities. Transport issues will also not be accepted as an excuse for late submission.

I submitted the wrong file to the e-submission website, but didn't notice at the time/I submitted the file for the wrong assessment/to the wrong department's system"

Comment: You should review your submission before confirming or submitting. Students submitting the wrong file or submitting to the wrong module on tabula will be able to re-submit the correct document, but will receive a late submission penalty based on when the deadline was and when the correct document was submitted. It is your responsibility to check that you have submitted the correct file to the correct assessment/department.

Exemptions

The Department cannot grant an extension to a test or reschedule the date of any test. If you are unable to take a mid-term test or your illness is of such long duration that it prevents you from submitting a piece of work within an appropriate extension, you can apply for an exemption, so that the work is condoned. The weighting of the assessment is normally passed onto your final examination for that module. In the case of WBS modules, if an assessment is missed or not submitted and you request an exemption based on mitigating circumstances, this will not be considered until the Exam Board. You will be given a mark of zero and this will only be condoned when the Exam Board meets.

Once again, all evidence should be submitted via the mitigating circumstances portal in tabula and should be submitted in a timely manner (one week for official documentation and 3 days for self-certifications).

Please note that requests made to condone absences from tests due to attendance at an interview or an assessment centre will not normally be accepted, unless there is clear evidence that the interview could not be postponed. This does NOT apply for examinations. We expect you to make clear to potential employers who may invite you to attend interviews and assessment centres that you have certain commitments throughout the academic year, and that attending tests is a compulsory part of your course.

These reasons for absences will not normally be condoned:

  • Open Days
  • family celebrations
  • holidays
  • mistakes with travel arrangements
  • mistake with time or location of test

Please note that this list is not exhaustive.

If you are unable to give a presentation due to illness (for example in EC304 or EC331), your tutor will re-schedule your presentation so long as you provide valid evidence for your mitigating circumstance to the UG office.

If you are not sure into which category a given assessment falls, please ask the UG office.

Good practice in assessment

Essay Writing Guidance

Essays are often a major source of uncertainty for incoming students. To understand the criteria used by your tutors to mark your written coursework, you should familiarise yourself with the information here. Not every module requires coursework in the form of essays, but the rules that apply to essays can often help in relation to other kinds of coursework too. Sources of advice on essay writing include:

  • departmental guidance in the form of marking criteria
  • your module Support and Feedback class tutor
  • your lecturer
  • the study skills sessions organised by Careers & Skills
  • online provision from the Library
  • regular drop-in session with the Economics Librarian in the Department.

You are advised to back up your files regularly to minimise the risk of losing documents. Please make sure that you do not leave the submission of your work until the last minute; build in some time to put things right if your computer crashes, as most submission is online, through Tabula.

Word limits

Please remember that work is judged on quality rather than quantity, and you must adhere to word limits and include your final word count clearly on your essay. If you feel you can say what you need to say in fewer words, then do so. We do not include a 10% margin above the word count. Excessive length will be penalised and the marker may ignore any material in excess of the word limit. Module leaders will indicate any exceptions to the standard word limit regulations, such as references. Do not include additional material in the form of lengthy footnotes or appendices unless this is specifically authorised by the coursework assignment.

Presentation

It is advisable for you to draw diagrams with computer packages where possible in order to further enhance your skills in this area. Pages should be numbered and submissions should be anonymous. You should include your student i.d. number on each page, but not your name.

Marking, Moderation and Feedback

Marking and moderation

A percentage mark will be awarded and recorded on each piece of assessed coursework. All marks that contribute towards your Diploma are moderated across the range of marks and across the first markers. Usually this involves taking a preliminary sample, then sampling more thoroughly where the preliminary sample indicates discrepancies. The agreed marks remain provisional until confirmed by the external examiner at the Exam Board. Thus, you are told your marks on a provisional basis. Due to moderation, the mark on your assessment may not be the same as the mark on Tabula. The mark on Tabula is your final moderated mark.

We want to reassure you that the marking and moderation for all our assessments is fair, consistent, robust and reliable and hence give you confidence that when you receive a mark, the mark has been arrived at following a detailed and rigorous process. You can find further details about the marking and moderation process on the Department's Assessment and Feedback pages.

If you have any concerns or feedback about the assessment process then please contact the Assessment and Feedback Coordinator, who is one of our Deputy Directors of Undergraduate Studies in the first instance.

Return of marked assessed work

Marked assessed work (excluding examinations and the RAE final project) will normally be available to you within 20 University working days after the submission deadline. Your marked work will be available on Tabula, or will be returned to you by your Support and Feedback class tutor.

Please also see the University Policy on the Timing of the Provision of Feedback to Students on Assessed Work.

Feedback on your assessed work

We take very seriously the provision of feedback to you on assessed work, most of which is electronic. We are sensitive to the importance of this and have mechanisms in place to enhance the quality of the feedback on assessed work. The Warwick tradition is to give some weight to assessed work submitted through the year, especially during years 1 and 2, to enable you to gauge your progress over time from the comments and marks you receive at regular intervals.

Feedback will be provided in a variety of ways. You may receive written comments on your work, or as a separate linked document, or as a summary of comments on the feedback sheet. These might indicate what was done well in your assessment, those areas where you could improve and a general evaluation of your coursework in aspects of presentation, structure and referencing. These comments should enable you to understand the basis of the mark you have been given and how you may improve your work in the future. You will also find the mark you received on Tabula. In addition, we provide generic feedback on assessments, which will provide more general comments on the cohort's performance on this assessment. It will outline particular aspects that were done well, common problems and ways to improve, as well as an overall assessment of performance, including a cumulative distribution function, which will allow you to determine how you performed relative to your peers.

If you are not satisfied with the quality of the feedback you have received, you should contact the module lecturer or the module Support and Feedback tutor. However, prior to doing this, you must be able to demonstrate that you have reviewed your personal feedback and the generic feedback and reflected on both through re-reading your work. You are also advised to make use of Advice and Feedback online hours to further discuss your feedback, noting, however, that markers are not permitted to re-read your assessment. Academic judgement cannot be challenged. If you still need more information contact the UG Office, who will forward your request for more feedback to the Director of Undergraduate Studies.

Other types of feedback on your progress

Feedback to you is provided in a variety of ways. There are many channels through which we give feedback other than only at the point of returning assessed work. Here are some of the different ways in which we provide you with feedback:

  • Module Support and Feedback classes complement pre-recorded and live lectures and are intended to give you the opportunity to test your understanding of material. In most module Support and Feedback classes, you will be expected to prepare some exercises or problem sets in advance and these will be discussed in the class. You will then have time during the module Support and Feedback class to work through a new set of questions, usually in groups and with the help of the tutor, before presenting answers to the rest of the class. We try to keep the number of students in these classes as small as possible so that your needs can be accommodated.
  • Pieces of non-assessed work, in addition to assessed work and tests, are collected periodically and feedback on these is given by tutors.
  • Tutors and lecturers advertise Advice and Feedback hours during which they are available to go over individual problems with you in an online forum.
  • Tutors and lecturers are accessible by email to receive and respond to individual clarification questions that can be addressed by email. Should your questions involve a more extensive nature your lecturer/tutor will advise you to make use of online Advice and Feedback hours.
  • A number of modules run online blogs or forums through which lecturers and tutors can respond to issues that you raise.
  • Where you wish to have feedback on more general issues beyond module-specific questions, feedback can be obtained from a variety of sources including the UG Office, the Director of Undergraduate Studies, your Personal Tutor, the Senior Tutor, the Year Tutors and the Director of Student Engagement and Progression.

Querying assessment marks

University regulations state that you may not query a mark awarded on a piece of assessed work, including an examination, on the basis of academic judgement. We will reject any requests by you to have your work reviewed on the basis that you disagree with the marker’s evaluation of your performance, whether it is based on the mark or the feedback. You are entitled to approach the module leader or lecturer to discuss your performance in the assessment, but please note what you must do prior to this, as outlined in the previous sectionLink opens in a new window. However, you are not permitted to ask your lecturer or tutor to re-read your work or comment on the mark/feedback and certainly not to lobby for a re-mark.

If you believe that the marks for a piece of coursework (not an exam) in a module run by the Department of Economics have been totalled incorrectly, you are permitted to request an arithmetic check on the paper. We have the right, after such an arithmetic check, to adjust the mark upwards or downwards.

Should you wish to request an arithmetic check of your marks for an assessment (not an exam), please complete an Assessed Work Mark Check form, which is available from the useful forms section. You should email it, together with the marked copy of the assessed work in question, to the UG Office within seven working days of the date the marked assessment was made available for you to view. We will then carry out a check of the marks. If no discrepancy is found, you will be advised of this and asked to collect your work. You will be advised that there is no right to a further check or questioning of marks. Should a discrepancy be discovered, we will calculate the correct mark for the work and adjust this on our systems. You will then be contacted and provided with a copy of your assessed work with the corrected mark annotated on it.

Referencing

You must provide a general bibliography at the end of your essay, listing all the works (and people) you consulted when researching the essay. Do not omit any sources. Do not ‘pad out’ the bibliography with works you have not consulted.

Correct referencing is important. To quote facts, figures, theories and theorems without accrediting their original source is an academic malpractice as well as being plagiarism. Direct quotations and results must be footnoted stating the author, publication or book, date and page or table number. If you rework published data or use it as the basis of your own calculations, you must identify the source in the same way. If you paraphrase the arguments or theories of other people you should again acknowledge the source in a footnote. Footnotes should be listed at the end of your essay, term paper or project. The following are three examples of the form of the footnotes.

  • Layard, R. How to Beat Unemployment, Oxford University Press, 1986, page 34.
  • Based on Feinstein C.H., “Capital Formation in Great Britain”, in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, P. Mathias and M.M. Postan (eds.),Cambridge 1978, page 29, table 2.
  • de Meza, D. and Webb, D. “Risk, Adverse Selection and Capital Market Failure” Economic Journal Volume 100, March 1990, pages 206-14.

In practice, you may find that some of the theories you mention have passed into the public domain and appear in any number of textbooks. Hence, it is not necessary to reference statements like: “Economic theory suggests that demand curves for normal goods are negatively sloped.”

However, any textbooks you use should be listed in the bibliography at the end of the essay, term paper or project. The bibliography should include all books and articles referred to in the particular piece of assessed work. Where tables of data are presented the source of the data should be stated at the foot of the table.

For further information on Plagiarism, you can refer to the online Plagiarism Tutorial on Moodle.Link opens in a new window

Plagiarism

In University Regulation 11Link opens in a new window, cheating is defined as “an attempt to benefit oneself or another, by deceit or fraud. This shall include reproducing one’s own work or the work of another person or persons without proper acknowledgement.”

We define plagiarism as a specific form of cheating: the attempt to pass off the theories, inferences, reasoning, computations or work of others as if they were your own. We also include plagiarising of one’s own work under our definition. It is your responsibility to familiarise yourself with individual departments’ policies on plagiarism if you are opting to take one of their modules.

Work submitted to the University of Warwick for official assessment must be all your own work and any parts that are copied or used from other people or from work you have previously submitted at Warwick or elsewhere must be appropriately acknowledged. Failure to properly acknowledge any copied work is plagiarism and may result in a mark of zero.

A significant amount of unacknowledged copying shall be deemed to constitute prima facie evidence of plagiarism, and in such cases the onus will be on you to establish otherwise. The university uses Turnitin as its plagiarism detector and all submitted work is analysed by Turnitin. The reports indicating the amount of your work that is similar to or taken from other sources is available to the marker, together with a reference to the original source. Check our Brief Plagiarism VideoLink opens in a new window on the Department's webpage to get familiar with Turnitin reports and similarity scores.

Each year a few students step across the line that separates poor scholarship from cheating. The penalties for cheating are severe and when we detect cheating we apply them rigorously. The penalties normally range from a mark of zero on the work concerned to a smaller deduction of marks. In the most severe cases, your place on the course may be threatened. There are also wider implications that can affect your future. For example, most employers expect a job reference to confirm that an applicant is honest, to the referee’s knowledge. If you have cheated in a piece of work, your referee may be unable to provide this assurance.

All of the practices on the following list constitute plagiarism:

  • reproducing ideas from another published work without citing the source
  • reproducing words from another published work without quotation marks and a citation of the source
  • copying another student’s work and pretending it is yours, with or without their permission, and whether they are a present or past student at this or any other university
  • colluding with other students to produce joint work for a non-group assessment
  • including sections from a piece of work that you have submitted previously at Warwick or another institution, including school, without referencing that you are reproducing them
  • downloading part or all of a document or ready-made essay from an internet website and pretending it is your own work
  • failure to include a complete bibliography at the end of your work.

The Department provides information regarding academic referencing and how to do it and you should check the Academic referencing section of the Handbook for details of this. In the first year, students are also required to participate in a compulsory Plagiarism Tutorial, as part of the Personal Development Module. You will find this a good source of information to understand what plagiarism is and how to avoid it in practice. Further sources of information are also available through the Library and our dedicated Librarian.

Penalties for Plagiarism

The procedure is described in University Regulation 11. The Department also has its own policy and procedure document used in the investigation of any case of suspected plagiarism.

As a summary of our Departmental plagiarism procedure, if a marker decides that he or she suspects plagiarism in a piece of coursework, he or she will report it to the Director of Undergraduate Studies, or his/her deputies. A review of the work will take place, and you will be invited to a meeting to discuss the work and the allegation. The Director or Deputy Directors of Undergraduate Studies will then make a recommendation to the Head of the Department about whether plagiarism has occurred and the penalty to be exacted. Where the Head of Department decides an offence has occurred and exacts a penalty, there are a number of different types of penalty available to the Department, with a maximum penalty of a mark of zero on the relevant piece of assessed work. Alternatively, in cases involving students beyond their first year of study, in cases where the plagiarism offence is felt to be severe, or in cases where a student has previously been found guilty of some form of cheating, the Head of Department may report the matter to the Academic Registrar for consideration by an Investigating Committee of the Senate. If the Committee finds an offence has been committed, it has the power to impose a mark of zero for the entire module unit or some more severe penalty. At each point you have rights of representation and defence which are described in the regulation and departmental procedure.

It should also be noted that the Investigating Committee can, and does, refer serious cases of cheating on to the Discipline Committee. The Discipline Committee can impose further penalties, including the termination of your registration at the University.

Why is plagiarism penalised?

Plagiarism is damaging. It damages the perpetrator, who does not learn how to be an economist, but learns how to be dishonest. It damages relations between tutors and students, because it generates suspicion. It damages all students when they leave, because the perpetrator will eventually devalue the reputation of a Warwick degree. It damages all academic staff, who have to spend time policing the rules in place of teaching and research.

Plagiarism is regularly detected and penalised and the penalties are severe. Effort taken to conceal plagiarism will usually be taken as evidence of the perpetrator’s intention. Therefore, the greater the effort, the more severe the punishment when it is detected. The vast majority of students would not even contemplate any kind of plagiarism. If you are tempted, please understand that the penalties and other repercussions can be severe.

What if I am accused of plagiarism, but wish to appeal?

If you are accused of plagiarism, the Director or Deputy Directors of Undergraduate Studies will give you the opportunity to make representations before a decision is taken.

Please note that if the Department finds that you have committed plagiarism, but you believe the Department's decision to be incorrect, you have the right to refer the matter to the Investigating Committee. A meeting of the Investigating Committee will then consider the case and take a decision as to whether it believes cheating has taken place or not. If it determines cheating has taken place, the Committee will decide on an appropriate penalty, which may or may not be the penalty previously imposed by the Department.

Students have the right to appeal against the decision/s of the Investigating Committee, but only on very specific grounds: please see Regulation 11 (6) and Regulation 11(10)Link opens in a new window.

Good practice and unfair practices

It is not plagiarism to cite without attribution ideas and theories that have passed into the public domain. The more widely you read and research your coursework, the quicker and better you will know what is and is not in the public domain, and the more safely you will be able to determine what can go without a supporting reference.

It is important for you to avoid the suspicion of plagiarism or cheating in your assessed work. The best way is to ensure that you adhere to good practice, represented by the rules for references and citations. Usually this means that when you first take notes from a book or article you should be careful to preserve the details of author, title, date, and page numbers. Such precision is an important transferable skill in itself, and shows that you are acquiring a professional approach.

Students who lack confidence in writing sometimes prefer copying or quoting from the textbook to expressing ideas in their own words. Why should they use their own words when somebody else’s words are better? Such students do not intend to cheat. They escape serious consequences by scattering quotation marks and references, sometimes, in large quantities. The marker is uneasy because it is not clear that the student has done more than a bit of intelligent cutting and pasting. It is impossible to be sure that the student has an independent understanding of the topic. Such work may pass, but will not get a good mark. It may, however, be brought to a plagiarism meeting.

Copying or paraphrasing lecture notes or online sources, even with quotation marks and citations, is something we would especially discourage. When you copy from a published source at least you have the security of knowing that the work that you are copying has been scrutinised by referees (of academic journals) and reviewers (of books). Lecture notes are not subject to independent scrutiny and have no such guarantees of quality. Notes provided by lecturers, or eventually online sources, should be only a starting point of your research, not your finishing point. Again, work based on lecture notes and/or online sources will not get a good mark.

Helping others to plagiarise or collaborate

Discussing your work with your colleagues can be a positive and fruitful learning experience. Often it is enhanced by showing your colleagues what you have done. However, there is no good reason for another student to ask to borrow a file on which your essay or project work is recorded. If your work is copied by another student, and the copying is detected, you lay yourself open to accusations of abetting or colluding with their cheating, or even of engaging in cheating yourself. The same will occur if you do not use the material yourself but pass it on to a third person, because without your involvement the cheating would not have been able to take place.

Collaboration, or working cooperatively with other students, is an excellent way of acquiring knowledge. Teamwork enables you to cover material more quickly and more efficiently. Having to explain things to others clarifies them and fixes them in your mind and can be an important part of your learning experience. But collaboration can give rise to concerns. Sometimes students fear that collaboration may lead to accusations of plagiarism, in the sense of passing off others’ work as your own.

We think there is a clear distinction between the cooperative acquisition of knowledge and the copying of another’s work and submitting it as your own. You may discuss an assignment with classmates, but you should always use your own words when working on an individually submitted piece of work. Your module tutor may supply you with further guidance. If you find yourself in a situation where cooperation with another student has become so close that you find yourselves working towards a joint result, discuss it with your tutor before submitting your work.

Other forms of cheating

There are many other kinds of cheating, including cheating in tests or exams. The following are just some types of cheating, all of which are punishable:

  • purchasing an essay or asking someone else to write it for you - this is a form of plagiarism
  • concealing information on or near your person during a test or exam and referring to this information during the test or exam
  • by using electronic devices to retrieve information in a on-online test or exam. Please note that if you are found to have an electronic device in non-online examination, you will receive a mark of 0%.
  • copying another student’s work or communicating with other students in a test or exam
  • arranging for another student to take a test or exam on your behalf
  • continuing to write after you have been told to stop writing in a test or exam
  • submitting any falsified documentation.

The above list is not exhaustive and any form of cheating can and will be punished by the University. As with plagiarism, the penalties for cheating in a test can be severe.

Cheating in a class test is dealt with in the Department, but may be passed onto the Academic Registrar and the Investigating Committee. If an invigilator suspects you of cheating in a class test, the invigilator should let you know that they will be submitting a report to the Director of Undergraduate Studies.

Once the invigilator has warned you that a report will be made, you will be allowed to complete the test. The investigative process and penalties are then the same as those set out for plagiarism and other forms of cheating in coursework.

Where should I go for advice on these matters?

If you have read all of the above and are still not sure what constitutes plagiarism, collusion or other forms of cheating, you should seek advice in good time from either the module leader, your module tutor, or your Personal Tutor. You can also access resources via the Personal Development Module's Plagiarism Tutorial and the Library. For advice on the Department's Plagiarism Procedure, please refer to the Undergraduate Programmes Manager.

Examinations

A significant proportion of your assessment will be in the form of University examinations. In 2021/22 we are planning for mainly online exams, but with set start times, as the majority of students will be based in the UK, but there may be some in person exams.

For on campus exams, you are required to bring your student ID card and place it on your desk, so that your identity can be checked during the examination. You should avoid bringing a bag with you to the examination room, as you will not be permitted to bring it into the exam with you. The use of PDAs or mobile phones, or any other hand-held devices that facilitate wireless communication is not permissible in examination conditions. If you are found to have an electronic device in an examination or test, even if it is switched off and hasn't been used, the penalty will normally be a mark of 0% on that examination and can be even more severe.

In case your exams are online, due to the ongoing nature of COVID-19, they will take place on the Alternative Exams PortalLink opens in a new window (AEP). The portal provides some general information on how exams will be arranged online. If you need further clarification, please visit the Alternative Exams Portal (AEP) FAQsLink opens in a new window.

In some departments where modules are assessed by a combination of coursework and examination, examiners prohibit you from answering exam questions that overlap with coursework previously submitted. This is not the case in Economics.

In all EC-coded examination papers, you may answer any question subject to the restrictions (rubric) written on the question paper itself, regardless of the assessed work you have submitted. Modules offered by other departments have their own examination methods. It is your responsibility to familiarise yourself with these, particularly regarding their rules and procedures for assessed work.

In principle, all materials outlined in the module overview document, content presented in lectures and Support and Feedback Classes, and content within further readings, are examinable. The module syllabus, as given on the module webpage, also indicates what is examinable. We do not specify what topics are to be included in or excluded from an examination paper, as is standard practice in the Department and University.

Examination dates and timetable

There are two examination periods, with the main exams being held in May/June and resit exams held in September. For more information on the exam periods, please see the Examinations Office websiteLink opens in a new window. Please note that examinations are scheduled centrally by the Examinations Office and, as such, the Department has no control on which exams are held on which day.

It is your responsibility to check the date, time and location of your exams and ensure you are there in time. If you are late to an exam, it is at the discretion of the invigilator as to whether you are permitted to sit it, but you will only receive the time remaining on the exam. If you miss an exam, you are not permitted to sit the exam later in the day. You will receive a mark of zero.

Special arrangements for exams

If you have a properly-documented and approved need for special arrangements for your examinations (e.g. you are allowed extra time to compensate for a condition) then these arrangements can be made. If your condition will last more than 12 months, typically evidence will be provided by Disability Services. But you do still need to notify us when asked to do so - otherwise late requests may not be granted. If you have a serious condition which will affect you sitting an exam but it will last less than 12 months, you will need to send medical evidence from a doctor or hospital to the UG Office. If it is in a language other than English then an official translation is required. You must contact Disability Services by the end of the spring term to register for special arrangements. Please check the Academic Office websiteLink opens in a new window for specific dates.

Please contact the UG Office with the details of any special arrangement requests.

Good practice in on -campus examinations

To maximise your chances of success in an examination, there are a number of things that you must do. You must:

  • Write legibly - we will make every attempt to read your exam paper, but if we cannot read it, you will not be permitted to re-write or type it.
  • Fill in the question numbers on the front page.
  • Use the correct number of answer booklets and answer questions in the right booklets, as set out in the exam rubric.
  • Check the exam rubric to see if you are permitted to have a calculator in the exam. It is your responsibility to ensure that your calculator fulfils the University’s criteriaLink opens in a new window

Other pointers for good practice in examinations, include:

  • familiarising yourself with what happens in the exam room by reading the Examination Regulations 10.2Link opens in a new window
  • familiarising yourself with the rubric beforehand and doing what the rubric asks (the rubric for each module can be found on the module webpage - it is better to use this source for accurate exam rubric rather than using past papers, as that may be out of date)
  • not wasting time writing out the question - but do write down the question number
  • striking out any material that is not to be read (e.g. unwanted attempts)
  • showing your working in mathematical/quantitative answers - enough to be awarded method marks if you get the wrong answer. In any case full marks ought not to be awarded for correct 'bottom line' answers - we are also interested in checking reasoning and understanding
  • answering only the number of questions indicated in the examination rubric. If you answer more questions than are prescribed by the rubric, and fail to provide a clear indication of which answers should be discarded by the marker (e.g. by crossing them out), then the marker will mark answers in the order in which they appear in the exam booklet and, after the prescribed number is reached, will discard the rest
  • make sure that if you use more than one answer booklet, you label them appropriately. Ensure that the separate booklets are tightly bound together so that they will not come apart before they reach the markers.
  • Other advice on how to tackle exams is available on the following websites:

Bilingual Dictionaries

If your first language is not English you are allowed to use a single-volume, non-specialist, general-purpose bilingual translation dictionary covering English and your first language. Permitted dictionaries should give only equivalent words and phrases in English and the first language, and should not include further explanatory text or appendices, other than of a trivial nature. Encyclopaedic, electronic, pictorial or specialist/subject-specific dictionaries (e.g. legal or business dictionaries) are not permitted.

It is your responsibility to provide your own bilingual dictionary. All bilingual dictionaries will need to be authorised by the Department and you should take it to Undergraduate Office (S0.98) prior to the exams period to get it stamped. No notes may be made in dictionaries.

Good practice in online examinations

To maximise your chances of success in an online examination, there are a number of things that you must do:

  • Familiarise yourself with the instructions on the AEP for each of your examinations and ensure that you follow them when completing your exam paper.
  • Answer the correct number of questions. If you answer more than the required number the department will mark the questions in the order that they appear, up to the required number of questions in each section.
  • Fill in the question numbers on the required page.
  • Ensure you only upload the required number of documents and in the correct format (all papers should be submitted in Word format, though some exams require an Excel file to be uploaded as well).
  • You can upload your work during the exam, so you have a record of your work and we recommend that you do so.
  • Check the last file that you upload to ensure that it is the version you want marked - if you upload an incorrect version we will only mark that one. If you upload a blank or corrupt file you will receive a mark of zero. It is your responsibility to check that you have uploaded the correct document to the correct module.
  • Try to ensure that your file size does not exceed 10MB.
  • Ensure that any images you insert have been compressed (following the department's guidanceLink opens in a new window), and are visible on the paper, images that cannot be seen clearly or are cropped might not be marked.

Other pointers for good practice in examinations, include:

Examination Feedback

We want to assure you that the marking and moderation for all our examinations is fair, consistent, robust and reliable and hence give you confidence that when you receive a mark, the mark has been arrived at following a detailed and rigorous process. All examination scripts have a first marker and a moderator and undergo an administrative check to ensure the marks have been totalled correctly. All results are considered by a Board of Examiners. Further details regarding the assessment procedures in the Department can be found on the Department's Assessment and Feedback webpages.

Following the decisions of the Exam Board, you will be able to access all of your marks via the Economics website and you will be sent a link for this. Following the September examination period, you will be provided with feedback from the summer exams, in the form of a break down of the marks you obtained per question on each module and, where the number of students is large enough, the summary statistics per question and a cumulative distribution function will also be available so that you can compare your performance with others on the module. Generic feedback on summer examinations will also be provided through a summary by question covering what was expected, what was generally done well and what was done poorly. Bottom line solutions to quantitative papers will also be provided as a further form of feedback. All feedback will be provided after the September examination period so that no student is advantaged and the feedback will be available for a limited period of time. The feedback is there for you to reflect on your performance, but you are not permitted to discuss the feedback with any member of staff.

If you are required to resit a failed module in order to be awarded your Diploma, you will automatically be sent a copy of your exam script. No other exam scripts will be made available to students. Tutors and lecturers will not be able to provide further individual feedback or explanation and you will not be able to use the script to challenge marks. Please note that the moderation process may have had the effect that the final mark on your script does not coincide exactly with the marks given to each part.

While you may appeal against an exam board decision, there is no provision under the University guidelines for you to challenge the academic judgement of the examiners or to dispute the marks awarded in individual modules or pieces of work.

If you have any concerns or feedback about the examination process then please contact the Quality Assurance and Examinations Coordinator in the first instance.

Examination boards

The Board of Examiners comprises a subset of full-time members of the academic staff in the Department of Economics and one external examiner appointed by the Senate. The Board, chaired by the Head of Department, makes recommendations that are subject to confirmation by the Senate.

External examiners are experienced senior academics from other universities whose role is to monitor our standards, to advise us on issues including borderline cases, and to act generally as independent arbiters and scrutineers to ensure that the Board’s decisions are fair. Please note that all marks are provisional and may be raised or lowered by the Exam Board.

Exam Board Decisions

The following are guidelines only and the Board of Examiners reserves the right to exercise its discretion in individual cases.

You will (full-time) normally take four full modules in one academic year. One full module can consist of two half-weight modules: in such a case the average of the marks for the half module counts as the mark for the full module.

  1. To pass the Diploma

    Aim:To broadly achieve at least a third class honours standard.
    Guidelines:(i) Pass (> 40%) at least 90 CATS
    (ii) An average mark of 40.0% or better over 120 CATS
  2. To pass the Diploma and satisfy the standard to proceed to the MSc

    Aim:Normally you would be required to achieve at least an upper second class honours standard
    Guidelines:(i) Pass (> 40%) at least 90 CATS
    (ii) An average mark of 58.0% or better over 120 CATS
    (iii) A mark of 60.0% or better on at least 60 CATS
  3. Resitting Students

    Normally resit marks will be based on the combined exam and assessment weights, and the total mark will be capped at 40%.

It is a requirement if you wish to proceed to the MSc that you must pass the Diploma at the first attempt and achieve the necessary higher marks outlined in (i), (ii) and (iii).

You will be notified by email when exam results are available with information on how to access them. Compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (2018) means that we will not give out examination or assessment marks over the telephone or to any third party without your prior written permission.

Mitigating circumstances

Detailed guidance on how to submit a case for mitigating circumstances and the evidence required to substantiate a case is available hereLink opens in a new window.

Mitigating circumstances are defined as:

  • Situations that the student could not have predicted and had no control over (e.g. serious illness, death of someone close, being the victim of crime, family difficulties and financial hardship);
  • Situations with negative impact on the student’s ability to undertake assessments/examinations which are independently evidenced in a timely fashion; (e.g. doctor’s note during illness showing duration and level of negative impact);
  • Situations that are acute or short term, the timing of which are relevant to the impact on study (normally within three weeks of the relevant assessment event deadline).

Mitigating Circumstances must be submitted to the Department using the personal circumstances portal in Tabula.

Deadlines

Where you are applying for an extension to a coursework deadline because of mitigating circumstances, you must apply as soon as possible and ideally before the submission deadline. For mitigating circumstances affecting your exam performance you must submit the form and evidence as soon as possible and no later than three working days following the last day of your University examinations. All other mitigating circumstances claims must be submitted as soon as possible and no later than five working days before the Mitigating Circumstance Panel, which normally takes place two weeks in advance of the exam board. For the June Exam Board the deadline for submitting claims is 4 June 2021.

Without wanting to invade your privacy, the University does expect that you bring such circumstances to the Department’s attention in a timely manner, despite the discomfort you might feel in so doing. The Department will do all it can to support you in difficult situations. You should be aware that mitigating circumstances not submitted by the relevant deadline cannot be considered by the Department and may only be considered by an Academic Appeals Committee as part of an academic appealLink opens in a new window.

Medical evidence

Evidence is a vital part of a mitigating circumstances submission. It must written by an independent qualified practitioner (letters from relatives are not acceptable); dated and written on headed or official notepaper and in English. If the letter is in another language students must provide both a copy of the original note and a certified translation into English. When requesting medical evidence to support your application for mitigation, you are advised to make clear to your doctor that the information will be shared with a number of people and to discuss with your doctor the most appropriate wording of the medical evidence.

Who to talk to

In order for your circumstances to be considered as mitigating by the Department, they must be conveyed formally to the Mitigating Circumstances Officer in the Department using the mitigating circumstances portal in Tabula. For UG students the Mitigating Circumstances Officer is the Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer.

We are aware that in some cultures it is considered shameful or embarrassing to disclose the details of these kinds of circumstance to those outside one’s family. This is not the case in the prevailing UK culture and you should be aware that the Department and the University are fully supportive of students in difficult circumstances and want to assist if at all possible. If you feel inhibited from talking to a Personal Tutor, Senior Tutor or Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer, you may also consider talking to a member of the SSLC, the Students’ Union, the Dean of Students or a member of staff in Student Support for initial, informal advice. Be assured that we treat all information in a confidential manner and our electronic filing system is secure. If you believe that your mitigating circumstances submission contains sensitive personal information and/or highly confidential evidence, you may submit your mitigating circumstances marked “strictly confidential and for the attention of the Chair of the mitigating circumstances panel only”.

Exam anxiety

Exams are a stressful time for all students and hence you should expect to feel some degree of anxiety during the exam period. When taking an exam, it is not uncommon for students to feel a rising level of anxiety and to think that it is a panic attack. A panic attack during an exam will not be taken as a severe mitigating circumstance, unless:

  • the Department already has evidence to confirm that you have a history of similar anxiety and panic attacks and can provide medical evidence of this panic attack.
  • significant medical evidence can be provided that documents the symptoms of the panic attack during the exam and confirms that you would have been unable to complete the exam under the circumstances.

Mitigating Circumstances Panel

The Mitigating Circumstances Panel is Chaired by the Director of Undergraduate Studies and membership includes the Senior Tutor, the Deputy Director of Undergraduate Studies, the Director of Studies, the Head of Department, the Year Tutor and the Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer. The panel has the following remit:

  • To consider details of applications for mitigating circumstances and make recommendations on the outcome of each application to the Board of Examiners.
  • To determine whether the circumstances submitted are acceptable grounds to grant mitigation and to grade them as rejected (R), mild (A), moderate (B) or severe (C).
  • To ensure that decisions are equitable and that there is consistency of treatment across cohorts.

Acute mitigation (e.g. for assessed work extension requests)

The Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer will review the mitigating circumstances in confidence and decide whether an extension or late submission penalty waiver is appropriate. A decision will normally be communicated to you within three working days. Detailed guidance on extension requests can be found hereLink opens in a new window.

Possible action by the Exam Board

For severe mitigating circumstances the Exam Board might recommend the candidate sits examinations (as for the first time) in September or the following May/June or offer a further opportunity for re-examination. In the case of first year students, mitigating circumstances are considered and recommendations are made by the Faculty First Year Board of Examiners. In the case of the Second Year Exam Board, it may be recommended that no action is required in terms of progress decisions, but the circumstances will be carried forward and be considered when determining the degree classification at a future meeting of the Board of Examiners. Please note that the Exam Board will not change any marks, whether module or average marks for any student, even if there are mitigating circumstances. The role of the Exam Board is to determine progression and Degree Class.

If you sit an exam or test, you are declaring yourself fit to sit and cannot retrospectively submit evidence of a mitigating circumstance.

Reasonable Adjustments 

Long term chronic conditions (normally greater than a term in duration and that are likely to continue) and disabilities are dealt with under the reasonable adjustmentsLink opens in a new window (RA’s) policy. However a significant deterioration of a permanent or chronic condition already reported and covered by reasonable adjustments, is classed as a mitigating circumstance. Guidance in relation to reasonable adjustments is available on the University web pages and is summarised below.

The Equality Act 2010Link opens in a new window requires the University to make reasonable adjustments where a candidate who is disabled (within the meaning of the Act), would be at a SUBSTANTIAL DISADVANTAGE in comparison to someone who is not disabled.

  • Noting ‘substantial’ is defined as ‘more than minor or trivial’ and that a disability is defined as ‘a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term negative effect on the ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’.
  • Students who have long term chronic conditions or disabilities and who believe they are entitled to reasonable adjustments should in the first instance contact Disability Services or Mental Health and Wellbeing and request an appointmentLink opens in a new window to discuss their support requirements.
  • A reasonable adjustment may be unique to the individual and could include special examination arrangements, delayed deadlines but also alternative methods of assessments.
  • Any reasonable adjustments made are evidence based; students are required to supply appropriate and recent medical evidence, or, in the case of a specific learning difference such as dyslexia or dyspraxia, a full diagnostic assessment. The type of appropriate evidence required can be discussed with Disability Services or Mental Health and Wellbeing.
  • Once a student has met with Wellbeing Support Services, the adviser will contact the student's department and the Examinations Office (with their permission) to recommend any specific adjustments.
  • Reasonable adjustment recommendations for examinations must be made before the annual deadlines as set out by the Examinations Office on the Disability ServicesLink opens in a new window website. Recommendations that are made AFTER these deadlines will be handled under the Mitigating Circumstances Policy.
  • Recommendations to apply reasonable adjustments may include for the student to be able to complete assessments via alternative assessment methods; bearing in mind that academic or professional standards in relation to core competencies and assessed criteria still need to be met.
  • Further information on disabilities and reasonable adjustments can also be accessed in the University’s Disability PolicyLink opens in a new window.

Appeals

If an Exam Board decides that your performance merits the award of a lower qualification than the one for which you were registered or does not merit the award of a qualification at all, you have certain rights of appeal within 10 days of notification. You are required to complete a form if you wish to appeal against the decision of the examiners for their course. Find out more about the appeals procedures at: www.warwick.ac.uk/services/academicoffice/examinations/students/appeals/Link opens in a new window

There is no right of appeal against the requirement to resubmit work or resit examinations.

Appeals may be made on one or more of the following grounds:

  1. There is evidence of exceptional circumstances that affected your performance which you were unable to present in time for the meeting of the Board of Examiners. In this instance, you are required to provide an explanation why the evidence was not available at the meeting of the Board of Examiners.
  2. There is evidence of procedural irregularity or unfair discrimination in the examination process.
  3. There is evidence of inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during your enrolment at the University. In this instance, you are required to explain why a complaint was not made at an earlier stage.

Appeals made on grounds covered by (1) or (3) will be rejected if you do not provide an explanation for the lack of availability of the evidence when the Board of Examiners reached its original decision.

If you have any queries about appeals please contact the Undergraduate Office: economics.ugoffice@warwick.ac.uk.

Higher Education Achievement Report (HEAR)

The University of Warwick issues a Higher Education Achievement Report (HEAR) to all undergraduate students. This is the official record and transcript of your academic achievements, including module marks, from your time at the University of Warwick. The HEAR is issued as an electronic document and also provides information about your programme of study and some additional achievements undertaken whilst at university. It is hoped that the information provided on the HEAR will prove useful both to graduates entering the job market and to potential employers, as well as to current students as a formative document.

Academic Integrity

What it Academic Integrity?

Academic integrity means committing to honesty in academic work, giving credit where we've used others' ideas and being proud of our own achievements

The Department follows the Academic Integrity FrameworkLink opens in a new window approved by the University. Students should ensure they are familiar with this, and with Regulation 11Link opens in a new window, which governs academic integrity.

A breach of academic integrity is called 'academic misconduct'. This term can include deliberate cheating, which Warwick's regulations define as 'an attempt to benefit oneself or another, by deceit or fraud... [including] reproducing one's own work or the work of others without proper acknowledgement'. However, a breach of academic integrity can occur inadvertently, for example due to being in a rush to complete an assignment, or by not checking what’s expected.

Misconduct includes:

    • Plagiarism. Presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own;
    • Self-plagiarism. Submitting the same work that you have already submitted for another assessment, unless this is permitted;
    • Taking a copy of another student’s work without their permission;
    • Passing someone your work to use as they see fit.
    • Collusion. Working with one or more other people on an assessment which is intended to be your own work;
    • Contract cheating. Where someone completes work for you, whether for remuneration or not, which is then submitted as your own (including use of essay mills or buying work online);
    • Arranging for someone else to impersonate you by undertaking your assessment or examination, in person or otherwise;

      • Accessing, or attempting to access, unseen assessment materials in advance of an in-person or online examination, or to obtain or share unseen materials in advance of an in-person or online examination, or to facilitate such activities;
      • Submitting fraudulent mitigating circumstances claims or falsifying evidence in support of mitigating circumstances claims (this may also be considered a non-academic disciplinary matter);

      • Fabrication or falsification of research, including falsifying data, evidence or experimental results;
      • Presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own.

      What is plagiarism?

      It is important for you to avoid the suspicion of plagiarism in your assessed work. It is not plagiarism to cite without attribution ideas and theories that have passed into the public domain. The more widely you read and research your coursework, the quicker and better you will know what is and is not in the public domain, and the more safely you will be able to determine what can go without a supporting reference. You should ensure that you complete the tutorial developed by the Library on Avoiding PlagiarismLink opens in a new window and the Department's module on plagiarism in the Year 1 Personal Development ModuleLink opens in a new window. You may also access a brief video on plagiarismLink opens in a new window prepared by the Department.

      The best way is to ensure that you adhere to good practice, represented by the rules for references and citations. Usually this means that when you first take notes from a book or article you should be careful to preserve the details of author, title, date, and page numbers. Such precision is an important transferable skill in itself, and shows that you are acquiring a professional approach.

      Students who lack confidence in writing sometimes prefer copying or quoting from the textbook to expressing ideas in their own words. Why should they use their own words when somebody else’s words are better? Such students do not intend to cheat. They escape serious consequences by scattering quotation marks and references, sometimes, in large quantities. The marker is uneasy because it is not clear that the student has done more than a bit of intelligent cutting and pasting. It is impossible to be sure that the student has an independent understanding of the topic. Such work may pass, but will not get a good mark.

      Copying or paraphrasing lecture notes or online sources, even with quotation marks and citations, is something we would especially discourage. When you copy from a published source at least you have the security of knowing that the work that you are copying has been scrutinised by referees (of academic journals) and reviewers (of books). Lecture notes are not subject to independent scrutiny and have no such guarantees of quality. Notes provided by lecturers, or eventually online sources, should be only a starting point of your research, not your finishing point. Again, work based on lecture notes and/or online sources will not get a good mark.

      Some other tips for avoiding plagiarism are:

      • Identify which key sources you may need to read and reference in good time before you start your assessment
      • Always be honest in your bibliography or literature review – it’s often the first place markers look when they start reading your assignment. It will also help you identify gaps in your own preparation if you only include sources you have genuinely consulted.
      • Read widely, and consult scholars who disagree with each other on theories or ideas and decide where you stand on the topic in question; just be sure to demonstrate how the existing literature has informed your writing, even if you come to your own conclusions
      • Don’t be afraid to use your own words – you’ll learn more, find your own voice as a writer, and your work will be more interesting to read. Just make sure you reference each theory and concept as well as each quotation, and be careful not to paraphrase or to stitch others’ ideas together as your own.
      • Organise and structure your work in your own way, this will help you develop your thinking and research on the subject and avoid inadvertently replicating others’ lines of argument or discussion

      Academic referencing

      It is important that you, no matter what your background is, familiarise yourself with the approaches used at Warwick. The fact that you may not have written essays before coming to this University is not an acceptable excuse. You must take the initiative to ensure you have all the skills needed to produce good work as it is expected here, and the referencing and plagiarism tutorial that forms part of the PDM will help with this. Bear in mind that there will be slight differences between what departments require so do not assume that the approach will be exactly the same if you are taking a module in another department.

      There are numerous online resources to help you grasp proper academic referencing including the LibraryLink opens in a new window, The Centre for Student Careers & SkillsLink opens in a new window and Global PADLink opens in a new window. We have a dedicated Economics Librarian coming to the Department regularly.

      If you are ever in doubt about referencing and avoiding plagiarism speak to your module tutor or your Personal Tutor before you submit your piece of work.

      Further guidance is also provided in the Moodle course Introduction to Referencing.

      Academic misconduct or poor practice?

      Warwick distinguishes between academic misconduct and poor academic practice. Academic misconduct is defined as follows:

       Academic misconduct are acts or omissions by a student which give or have the potential to give an unfair advantage in an  examination or assessment, or might assist someone else to gain an unfair advantage, or an activity likely to undermine the  integrity essential to scholarship and research. (Regulation 11)

      Academic misconduct requires the intention to obtain an unfair advantage, or knowingly engaging in a behaviour that has the potential to give an unfair advantage, irrespective of whether such advantage is actually obtained. (Regulation 11)

      Poor academic practice is less serious than academic misconduct, but should be avoided nonetheless:

      Poor academic practice is the failure to observe principles of academic integrity. It typically (but not exclusively) occurs when referencing is inadequate, but not in a way suggesting that the student attempted to gain an unfair advantage. (Regulation 11)

      Poor academic practice should be used where the extent of plagiarism or other misconduct is limited. It can be used  in  particular at earlier stages of a student’s degree, when they might only have an imperfect understanding of the principles of  academic integrity. It can be found, e.g., where a student has referenced the material used but not indicated that it is a verbatim quote. (Guidance on Regulation 11)

      There is no penalty for poor academic practice: marks are not deducted, instead work is assessed under the marking criteria  (e.g., the University Marking Scales have an implicit expectation in respect of good academic practice). (Regulation 11)

      Should poor academic practice be identified in your work, the Department will provide you with resources to help you to improve on your academic practice skills. Please also see the section on Academic Referencing in this Handbook.

      Student collaboration and academic integrity

      Discussing your work with your colleagues can be a positive and fruitful learning experience. Often it is enhanced by showing your colleagues what you have done. However, there is no good reason for another student to ask to borrow a file on which your essay, project work or exam scripts are recorded. If your work is copied by another student, and the copying is detected, you lay yourself open to accusations of abetting or colluding with their academic misconduct, or even of engaging in academic misconduct yourself. The same will occur if you do not use the material yourself but pass it on to a third person, because without your involvement the academic misconduct would not have been able to take place.

      Collaboration, or working cooperatively with other students, is an excellent way of acquiring knowledge. Teamwork enables you to cover material more quickly and more efficiently. Having to explain things to others clarifies them and fixes them in your mind and can be an important part of your learning experience. But collaboration can give rise to concerns. Sometimes students fear that collaboration may lead to accusations of plagiarism, in the sense of passing off others’ work as your own.

      We think there is a clear distinction between the cooperative acquisition of knowledge and the copying of another’s work and submitting it as your own. You may discuss an assignment with classmates, but you should always use your own words when working on an individually submitted piece of work. Your module tutor may supply you with further guidance. If you find yourself in a situation where cooperation with another student has become so close that you find yourselves working towards a joint result, discuss it with your tutor before submitting your work.

      In terms of collaboration during University exams and tests, whether online or in-person, this is strictly forbidden. You should not engage in any contact of any kind with third-parties, including other students, while you are undertaking a University exam or test or even after you have finished it, but while the test or exam window is still open and hence other students may still be taking the test/exam. This includes, but is not limited to: telephone conversations, instant messaging, text messaging, group messaging and email messages. Making contact with others to discuss a University exam or test at the time you or they are undertaking that exam/test is a form of academic misconduct. You should also not share your previous exam/test scripts with other students, or use exam/test scripts obtained from other students in your assessed or examined work.

      How we investigate suspected breaches of academic integrity

      Here is a summary of our Departmental academic integrity procedure:

      (1) Where a marker decides that they suspect academic misconduct in a piece of assessed work, they will report it to the module leader and an initial discussion will take place between the marker and the module leader. Where academic misconduct is suspected by an invigilator or other member of University staff in an in-person, or online, examination, the Invigilator will raise their concerns with the student and inform them that a report of suspected academic misconduct will be made to the Head of the Department.

      (2) Should the module leader (in the case of a piece of assessed work) or Head of Department (in the case of an examination) confirm that there is a suspicion of academic misconduct, they will refer the case to Academic Integrity Lead for Economics who will determine whether the case should be investigated. Should the module leader or Head of Department determine that the student's work is showing poor academic practice but not academic misconduct, they will refer back to the marker or module leader for the work to be marked and to provide the student with guidance and advice on how to improve their academic practice.

      (3) Should academic misconduct be suspected, an Academic Conduct Panel (ACP) will be convened in Economics, which comprises one of the Assessment, Feedback and Academic Integrity team as Chair, plus at least one other member of academic staff, and the Assistant Programmes Manager. The student will be invited to attend this Panel, along with a student-nominated representative for support, if desired, and/or to submit a statement. The Panel will consider the evidence gathered, including the student's written statement and/or verbal statement.

      (4) The ACP will consider whether the case constitutes: (i) poor academic practice, (ii) academic misconduct or (iii) neither academic misconduct or poor academic practice.

      (5) In the case of (i), guidance will be provided by the Module Leader to the student to help them improve on their academic practice and referencing.

      (6) In the case of (ii), the ACP will make a report (including any additional evidence or statements) and a recommendation as to the appropriate sanction to the Head of Department (or their Deputy). The Head of Department will review all of the evidence and agree with the recommendation or make their own determination, which may include referral to the Academic Registrar.

      (7) The student will be written to and informed of the outcome and any applicable sanction, they will be provided with a copy of the report.

      (8) The student may either accept the sanction or may request, within ten University Working Days of being informed by the Head of Department of the sanction, that the case be referred to the Academic Registrar to be considered by a University-level Academic Integrity Committee (AIC).

      (9) If, at (6) the Head of Department decides to refer the case upwards, it will be heard by an University-level AIC.

      (10) The AIC will decide whether there is a case to be heard, and if so, a meeting will be convened, to which the student and their chosen representative will be invited.

      (11) The student will receive the decision of the AIC in writing after the meeting;

      (12) The student has the right of appeal against either the decision of the AIC or the sanction applied.

      Please note that the level of proof required for suspected academic misconduct to be found proven or not proven is the civil standard ‘the balance of probabilities’, that is, on the basis of the available evidence it is more likely than not that the student committed academic misconduct.

      Consequences of breaches of academic integrity

      Breaches of academic integrity are damaging. They damage the perpetrator, who does not learn how to be an economist, but learns how to be dishonest. It damages relations between tutors and students, because it generates suspicion. It damages all students when they leave, because the perpetrator will eventually devalue the reputation of a Warwick degree. It damages all academic staff, who have to spend time policing the rules in place of teaching and research.

      Breaches of academic integrity are regularly detected and penalised and the penalties are severe. The policies are strict even if it’s the first time your work has not met standards of academic integrity: here are some of the possible consequences:

      The University makes the following sanctions available to an Academic Conduct Panel:

      (i) A reduction in mark for the assessed work to reflect the impact of the academic misconduct. The mark may be reduced down to zero;

      (ii) Require re-submission of the original work with revised referencing, for a capped mark;

      (iii) Require re-submission of a new piece of work for a reduced or capped mark.

      In addition to those above, an Academic Integrity Committee may impose the following sanctions:

      (i) Determine that the student’s previous work, for which credits had already been accumulated, is to be investigated for academic misconduct by the student’s home department;

      (ii) Recommend to the Academic Registrar that the student be withdrawn from the University, either for a temporary period or permanently under Regulation 36;

      (iii) Determine that a student shall have no right to resubmit, or remedy failure with respect to, the piece or pieces of work in respect of which the case was referred to the AIC.

      Academic integrity advice and support

      The University provides comprehensive guidance on academic integrity and links to resources on the Academic Integrity website.Link opens in a new window

      If you have any questions on this, you should seek advice in good time from either the module leader, your module tutor, or your Personal Tutor. For advice on the Department's Academic Integrity Procedure, please refer to the Assistant Programmes Manager on economics.integrity@warwick.ac.ukLink opens in a new window. There is also a a department Academic Integrity pageLink opens in a new window, where you will find further information and guidance.