School Planning and Organisation

This section is for school management. It is designed to assist them with how to include QUASAR within school processes.

Developing guidelines for answering questions

It is important for schools to develop a set of guidelines for answering questions. The guidelines are a way of clarifying minimum expectations for moderation and reflection.

Example guidelines

Guidelines will differ due to the varying nature of disciplines. The guidelines below are from the School of Computing and Mathematics.

This section gives guidelines how to fill in some of the questions in the Quality Assurance and Reflection (QUASAR) system (https://teach.csu.edu.au/quasar). These guidelines clarify the school’s expectations of moderation.

Moderation and Grades (M&G) Q1: (Moderation Process)

It is expected that at least the following actions are performed and therefore ticked in QUASAR:

Subjects with multiple markers

  • (for exams) 'A marker trial marks a sample and shares with rest of marking team'
  • 'A pre-marking meeting with markers to discuss marking guide'
  • 'Cross-checking the marking of a sample of each marker'
  • 'Sample assessments at borderline grades (e.g. high credit/low distinction)'
  • 'Wrap up conversation with marking team to discuss the assessment task and common feedback to be provided to students on Interact'
Subjects with one marker
  • 'Cross-checking the marking of a sample of each marker'
  • 'Sample assessments at borderline grades (e.g. high credit/low distinction)'

M&G Q2 (Sample size?)

Standard moderation sample sizes:

  • Partner 10% min 10, max 20 per marker.
  • Non-partner 10% min 5, max 20 per marker.

(A larger sample size can be asked for if needed)

M&G Q2b (Why choose these items?)

Default response:' Largest weighted assessment item was moderated for all markers. For markers on probation, assessment tasks worth 20% or more were also moderated.'

Add explanation on number of markers and which were on probation to add clarity if needed.

M&G Q3 (Marks adjusted?)

This question will be used to determine if study centre markers/lecturers should remain on probation or be able to come off. If marks were adjusted, then enter yes and explain the situation. If a subject has multiple cohorts or multiple markers make it clear which cohorts and markers the mark adjustment applied to and the magnitude of the change.

M&G Q4 (Moderator's role and responsibility)

Default responses:

  • Option 1: Convenor is only person in teaching team (e.g. single cohort with no partners)'I selected the sample and cross-checked the marking. I also checked the grade centre(s).'
  • Option 2: Convenor is only coordinator, but they have a marker (e.g. single cohort with separate marker)'The convenor moderated their marker. My role was to check the convenor's grade centre and verify the moderation process was aligned to school policy.'
  • Option 3: Multiple coordinators and convenor is a coordinator (e.g. multiple cohorts and convenor is coordinator of DE cohort)

‘The moderation was managed by the convenor. My role was to check the convenor's grade centre and verify the moderation process was aligned to school policy.'

  • Note: in this case ideally the convenor's marking is shared as an exemplar and hence moderated by the rest of the subject team. If this sharing is not possible (e.g. large project submissions) then Moderator should check the convenor's marking and the following sentence be added

'I selected the sample and cross-checked the marking for the convenor's cohort.'

  • Option 4: Study centre only offerings

'The moderation was managed by the convenor. My role was to verify the moderation process was aligned to school policy.'

Reflection and Planning (R&P) Q2

Celebrate what has gone well and reflect generally about the subject. Comments are also required for any of the following cases. If appropriate, add actions (at the bottom of the form) to address these. It is acceptable to explain what action items are already in place, or to explain that an action item is not needed. Using sample size and trend data can inform your comments (the colour coding in the dashboard helpfully identifies small samples).

  • Progressive rate < 80%.
  • Percentage of on-time EASTS < 95%
  • Percentage of positive responses for the student evaluation, PPR < 65%.
  • Subject Outline was late

Reflection and Planning (R&P) CASIMS action items Use the following people as CASIMS document reviewers:

  • UG IT: Tim Brooke-Taylor
  • PG IT: Graeme Garden
  • MTH/STA: Bill Oddie