| MRGS home | Research programs | Scholarships and Grants | Graduate Centre | Seminars | About us |
| Staff directory | A-Z index | Site map |
| MRGS home | Research programs | Scholarships and Grants | Graduate Centre | Seminars | About us |
| Staff directory | A-Z index | Site map |
Chapter 7: Thesis and examination matters7.14 Examination Board for MPhil candidatesThe Examination Board shall comprise the following:
The convenor will be the associate dean (graduate studies/research degrees) or his/her nominee, for example a member of the relevant faculty committee. In the case where the convenor is from the same department or school as the student, a senior academic from outside the department or school must be nominated. The fourth panel member is required in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest and to maintain the standards and quality assurance of the examination. The Examination Board shall have several tasks:
The role of the Examination Board is similar to that of the undergraduate Board of Examiners, in that it determines grades and numerical marks. It is also similar to the advisory panel that is convened during certain doctoral examinations, in that it contains a fourth member from outside the academic unit who ensures that conflicts of interest will not arise, and in its capacity to perform as an advisory panel where necessary. 7.14.1 PassThe work is to be passed without amendment. 7.14.2 AmendmentsCandidates and academic units are advised if amendments are required and requested to collect all the thesis copies from the Monash Research Graduate School. Guidelines for the insertion of changes into copies of the thesis are sent to candidates and academic unit. Amendments must be made to all available copies of the thesis. When the amended copies are received by the faculty, together with the form certifying that amendments have been completed to the satisfaction of the head of the academic unit, the award of degree may normally proceed. Note: Where an examiner or examiners recommend the thesis be passed or passed subject to amendments, the mark they recommend must be 60% or above. In the case of 'pass' or 'amendments' the final thesis grade is normally determined by the Research Graduate School Committee by averaging the two marks, without an Examination Board being convened. 7.14.3 Revision and resubmissionA recommendation that the thesis be revised and resubmitted must not be accompanied by a mark. A mark will be determined once the thesis has been resubmitted and re-examined. Where both examiners recommend revision and resubmission, the normal recommendation of the Examination Board shall be that the thesis be revised and resubmitted to both examiners. These examiners will be asked to grade the resubmitted thesis at 60% or above if their recommendation is that the thesis be passed, or passed subject to amendments. Where one examiner recommends a pass (or pass with amendments), the Examination Board may recommend either that the thesis be:
Where the adjudicator endorses the assessment of the original assenting examiner, the thesis shall be passed and the final numerical grade determined by the common grade and mark recommended by both or by averaging the two marks. Example: Examiner A: 84% Example: Examiner A: 85% Where the adjudicator also recommends revision and resubmission, the candidate will be invited to revise and resubmit the work to either the dissenting examiner and the (dissenting) adjudicator, who shall each recommend a final outcome and a mark, where his/her recommendation is pass or pass subject to amendments. A final grade and mark for the thesis will then be delivered by the Examination Board. 7.14.4 FailWhere both examiners recommend that the thesis be failed, the Examination Board shall deem the thesis to have failed. Where one examiner only recommends that the thesis be failed and the other recommends that the thesis be passed (or be passed with amendments), the Examination Board will normally recommend the appointment of an adjudicator, and a final grade shall be determined as above. Where one examiner only recommends that the thesis be failed and the other recommends that the thesis may be revised and resubmitted, the Examination Board will again appoint an adjudicator, as above. 7.14.5 Other instances where an adjudicator may be appointedAn adjudicator must be appointed in cases where the examiners’ marks differ markedly by 20% points or more, for example examiner A awards a mark of 70% (H2A) and examiner B awards 90% (H1), as the average of these marks (80%) is likely to result in a thesis mark which fails to reflect the view of either examiner. Where, however, the examiners’ marks differ by less than 20 points but the marks awarded are two grades apart, for example examiner A awards a mark of 62% (H2B) and examiner B awards 80% (H1), the Examination Board may exercise its discretion as to whether an adjudicator will be appointed or not. In such cases, the common mark adopted by the adjudicator and the examiners with which he/she agrees shall be the final grade, or where the adjudicator agrees with neither of the examiners, an average of the three marks will assist the Examination Board in reaching a final determination. Example: Examiner A: 85% Example: Examiner A: 85% 7.14.6 Material submitted to the adjudicatorIt is considered appropriate that where a thesis is to be submitted for adjudication, the candidate is invited to submit a written defence of the thesis in response to the criticisms and comments of the dissenting examiner. The candidate’s defence will then be sent to the adjudicator together with the thesis and the de-identified examiners’ reports. Both the candidate and the examiners are informed that an adjudicator has been appointed and the candidate is informed of the adjudicator’s name under the same conditions of confidentiality as apply to the appointment of examiners. The identity of the original examiners and the adjudicator are not revealed to each other, however. The committee considers an appropriate order in which an adjudicator might proceed with the task is first to read the thesis, next assess the examination reports and finally consider the candidate’s thesis defence. 7.14.7 Role of the adjudicatorIn summary, the adjudicator’s role may be defined as follows: An adjudicator is not an additional examiner, but a judge requested to pronounce on the relative soundness, correctness and appropriateness of the initial two examiners’ recommendations. To this end, the adjudicator should offer an opinion on whether the examiners were competent and fair. For example, the adjudicator should assess whether:
An adjudicator is then asked to provide reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with examiners. It should be reiterated that in making an assessment on the appropriateness of the two examiners’ reports, the adjudicator is not being asked to set additional requirements for the candidate. The adjudicator will also be asked to complete the adjudicator’s form, including the recommendation of a mark and grade. 7.14.8 Final determination of overall grade and numerical markThe Examination Board has the power to moderate marks by no more than two percentage points where the overall grade is close to the cut-off for a higher honours grade. Having received the adjudicator’s advice, the Examination Board shall determine a final grade, as above. The Research Graduate School Committee must ultimately determine whether a candidate has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the degree after considering:
|