Examples of Use of Discretion

Undergraduate

Example 1
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
54
60
65
53
53
63
1st

2.1
80
40
120

2.2
20
70
90

Mod 4
61
63

Mod 5
62
61

3
20
10
30

Mod 6
62
54

Mod 7
40
51

Mod 8
40
44

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

58
67
67
61
58.1
57.5
58.0
58
61
58
58
56.4

Improving performance
at stage 3 (exit velocity):
but weighting 2:1

Marks Profile
140
120
100
80

Stage 3
Stage 2

60

Does 30 credits at 3rd

class weaken case for
promotion?

All

40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Within two marks of 60 so the exercise of discretion must be

considered. 80 credits of 2:1, 20 credits of 3rd and 20 credits of 2:2 at
stage 3. 40 credits of 2:1, 70 credits of 2:2 and 10 credits of 3rd class
at stage 2. The overall profile is predominantly 2:1, so there would
be a good argument for awarding the higher class, but the BoE could
decide differently. (Convention 56)

Example 2
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
54
60
65
53
53
63
1st

2.1
80
40
120

2.2
20
70
90

Mod 4
62
63

Mod 5
63
61

F
20

10
10

Mod 6
63
54

Mod 7
38
51

Mod 8
38
44

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

58
67
67
61
58.0
57.5
58.0
58
61
58
58
56.4

Marks Profile

20
140
120

Does 20 credits of fails

at stage 3 influence
the decision?

100
Stage 3

80

Stage 2
60

All

40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Within two marks of 60 so the exercise of discretion must be considered. 80 credits

of 2:1, 20 credits of 2:2 and 20 credits of fail at stage 3. 40 credits of 2:1, 70 credits
of 2:2 and 10 credits of 3rd class at stage 2. This is similar to example 1 except that
there is 20 credits of fail at stage 3. This does not affect the candidates entitlement to
honours, but might colour the Boards view about exercising discretion to award a
2:1. The fail differentiates this from example 1, possibly justifying different
decisions in each case, despite the weighted average being the same. (Convention
56)

Example 3
Stage 3
Stage 2

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
57
57
65
58
60
63

Mod 4
59
63

Mod 5
45
61

Mod 6
45
62

Mod 7
48
63

Mod 8
48
60

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

58
63
65
59
55.8
57.5
58.0
58
61
61
61
60.9

Mitigating circumstances - affecting modules 5,6,7 and 8 at stage 3. Ranked 2 (scale 0-3) by PECC
Marks Profile

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

1st

2.1
30
100
130

2.2
50
20
70

3
40

40

140
120
100
Stage 3

80

Stage 2

Mitigating circumstances
rated 2

60

All

40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Within two marks of 60 so the exercise of discretion must be considered. 30 credits

of 2:1, 50 credits of 2:2 and 40 credits of 3rd class at stage 3. 100 credits of 2:1, 20
credits of 2:2 at stage 2. So no good case for discretion on the profile of marks.
However, the 40 credits at stage 3 with 3rd class marks have been ranked by the PEC
Committee as having been affected by mitigating circumstances ranked as level 2
(moderate). These are the modules with the worst performance; other marks are 2:1
or high 2:2, and stage 2 was of 2:1 standard. So there could be a good case for
exercising discretion on the grounds of medical or other mitigating circumstances.
(Convention 56)

Example 4
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 1:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
57
64
67
58
48
54

1st

2.1
70
10
80

2.2
50
80
130

Mod 4
65
56

Mod 5
57
55

30
30

Mod 6
57
56

Mod 7
58
56

Mod 8
58
60

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

64
64
63
68
61.8
57.5
58.0
53
50
48
45
53.3

Marks Profile
140
120
100
Stage 3

80

Improving performance
at stage 3 (exit velocity):
weighting 1:1

Stage 2
60

All

40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Within two marks of 60 so the exercise of discretion must be considered. 70 credits

of 2:1, 50 credits of 2:2 at stage 3. 10 credits of 2:1, 80 credits of 2:2 and 30 credits
of 3rd class at stage 2. The case for exercising discretion on the grounds of the profile
of marks is not strong. However, note that the stages are equally weighted in this
case, so we can consider the progressive improvement argument for discretion. The
weighted average has risen from 53.3% at stage 2 to 61.8 at stage 3, so there could
be a case for awarding the higher class on the grounds of improved marks.
(However, if a 2:1 weighting had been used this would not have been an automatic
2:1, as the weighted average is 59) (Convention 56)

Example 5
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 3:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
57
70
70
58
64
65

1st
50
20
70

2.1
60
90
150

2.2
10
10
20

Mod 4
65
64

Mod 5
67
61

Mod 6 Mod 7 Mod 8 Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded
67
67
68
68
75
75
75
68.7
67.5
68.0
61
64
60
71
72
61
65
63.8
Modules 10-12 are the dissertation
Marks Profile
160

140
120
100

Is 75% for dissertation

exceptional?

Stage 3
Stage 2

80

All

60
40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Within two marks of 70 so the exercise of discretion must be considered. 50 credits

of 1st class marks, 60 credits of 2:1 and 10 credits of 2:2 at stage 3. 20 credits of 1st
class, 90 credits of 2:1 and 10 credits of 2:2 at stage 2. There is not a very strong
case for a first on the profile of marks, but the candidate scored 75 in the
dissertation. One ground for exercising discretion is exceptional performance in any
particular module (e.g. a research-based module), so the Board would need to
consider whether 75 was exceptional for a dissertation mark. (Convention 56)

Example 6
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
37
45
46
45
41
40

1st

2.1

2.2
20
20
40

Mod 4
41
40

Mod 5
35
40

3
60
100
160

F
40
40

Mod 6
48
40

Mod 7
33
45

Mod 8
33
55

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

55
54
46
45
43.2
43.3
43.0
50
42
42
43
43.6

Marks Profile
180
160
140
120

Pass or 3rd class

Honours degree?

Stage 3

100

Stage 2

80

All

60
40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Candidate has a third class weighted average, but 40 credits of fail and is not
automatically entitled to an honours degree. The fail marks are 37, 35, 33 and 33.
The candidate clearly meets the criteria for a pass degree and the right to resit for
honours, but the Board might want to consider exercising its discretion under
convention 56(c) to award a third class degree. The weighted average mark is solidly
in the band and none of the fail marks is terrible. Is it worth forcing the candidate to
resit for a third, which would be achieved by getting two of the fail marks up to 40?)

Example 7
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
25
33
28
45
41
40
1st

2.1

2.2

Mod 4
45
40

Mod 5
35
40

3
40
120
160

F
80
80

Mod 6
41
40

Mod 7
33
44

Mod 8
33
42

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

35
44
42
33
35.6
37.5
38.0
42
42
40
40
41.3

Marks Profile
180
160
140

HE Diploma or Pass
degree?

120
Stage 3

100

Stage 2

80

All

60
40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Weighted average is within two marks of 40, so the exercise of discretion must be
considered. However, there are 80 credits of fail so the candidate does not actually
meet the criteria for a pass degree and is only entitled as of right to an HE Diploma,
with a right to resit for a 3rd. The weighted average mark required for a pass degree is
35, so it is the number of failed credits which is the problem. There is no justification
for using discretion to award a 3rd, but a Board might wish to consider whether to
exercise its discretion to award a pass degree, but it might decide not to do so.
(Convention 63)

Example 8
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
10
10
40
40
40
40

1st

2.1

2.2

Mod 4
42
40

Mod 5
42
40

3
100
120
220

F
20
20

Mod 6
41
40

Mod 7
41
41

Mod 8
42
41

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

41
43
42
40
36.2
37.5
38.0
41
40
40
40
40.3
Marks Profile

250

200

150

Pass or 3rd class

Honours degree?

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

100

50

0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

Weighted average is within two marks of 40, so the exercise of discretion must be
considered. 100 credits of third class, and 20 credits of bad fail at stage 3. 120
credits of 3rd class at stage 2. The 20 credits of fail has no impact on a candidates
right to an honours degree, but could influence the exercise of discretion. However,
in this case the profile is so overwhelmingly of 3rd class honours standard, that it
would be very harsh not to award 3rd class honours. (Convention 56)

Example 9
Stage 3
Stage 2

Stage 3
Stage 2
All

Weighting 2:1
Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 3
60
70
70
58
64
72

1st
70
40
110

2.1
50
70
120

2.2
10
10

Mod 4
67
63

Mod 5
65
61

Mod 6
63
61

Mod 7
69
64

Mod 8
71
60

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Stage ave Wgtd ave Rounded

71
73
72
74
68.8
67.4
67.0
71
72
61
70
64.8

Marks Profile
140

120
100

Near to borderline and

good marks profile

Stage 3

80

Stage 2
60

All

40
20
0
1st

2.1

2.2

Degree Class

The weighted average is just outside the band for automatic consideration, so
consideration of the exercise of discretion under Convention 56 does not apply.
However, consideration under Convention 40 is still possible. This is a very near
miss for a first and has 70 credits of 1st class and 50 credits of 2:1 at stage 3. Stage
2 is less distinguished with 40 credits of 1st class, 70 credits of 2:1 and 10 credits of
2:2. There is still a case for considering this candidate for a first, principally on the
grounds that it is so near the boundary and that there is a good profile of marks.
(Convention 40)

Examples of Use of Discretion

Postgraduates

Example 1
Mod 1
57

No core modules
Mod 2
57

Mod 3
58

Mod 4
58

Mod 5
60

Mod 6
60

Mod 7
58

Mod 8
58

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

56
56
55
58

Dissn Wgted ave

58
57.7

Rounded
58

The weighted average mark is within 2 marks of 60 and therefore the

use of discretion by the Board must be considered. There are only 20
credits of marks > 60, so there is no case on the basis of the profile for
awarding a merit. (Convention 60)

Example 2
Mod 1
60

No core modules
Mod 2
60

Mod 3
62

Mod 4
62

Mod 5
60

Mod 6
58

Mod 7
50

Mod 8
50

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Dissn Wgted ave

53
53
55
54
60
57.6

Rounded
58

The weighted average mark is within 2 marks of 60 and therefore the

use of discretion by the Board must be considered. There are 110
credits (incl. dissertation) with marks > 60, so there is a good case for
awarding a merit on the basis of the profile of marks. (Convention 60)

Example 3
Mod 1
63

No core modules
Mod 2
63

Mod 3
70

Mod 4
62

Mod 5
64

Mod 6
64

Mod 7
70

Mod 8
64

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

65
61
60
63

Dissn Wgted ave

75
67.7

Rounded
68

The weighted average mark is within 2 marks of 70 and therefore the use of
discretion by the Board must be considered. There are only 20 credits of taught
modules with marks > 70, as well as the dissertation. Whether 80 credits of
distinction level performance is enough to justify awarding a distinction is
debatable, but 75 in the dissertation might be enough to justify a distinction on the
grounds of excellent performance in a particular module, with research-based
modules being the example given. (Convention 60)

Example 4
Mod 1
75

No core modules
Mod 2
66

Mod 3
74

Mod 4
66

PECC

Mod 5
66

Mod 6
52

Mod 7
52

Mod 8
68

Mod 9
68

Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

68
68
72

Dissn Wgted ave

70
67.5

Rounded
68

Mods 6 and 7 Level 3 support

The weighted average mark is within 2 marks of 70 and therefore the

use of discretion by the Board must be considered. There are 90
credits with marks over 70, 70 credits with marks 60-69 and 20
credits with marks 50-59. The profile of marks consists of half
distinction level work, but includes some pass level credits. There
would be a case for exercising discretion to award a distinction, but a
board could legitimately decide not to do so, so long as it treated
similar cases in the same way. (Convention 55). However, with level
3 support for modules 6 & 7 (the two lowest marks), this could make
a difference.

Example 5
Mod 1
42

No core modules
Mod 2
44

Mod 3
52

Mod 4
45

Progression decision at end of taught programme

Mod 5
45

Mod 6
52

Mod 7
52

Mod 8
55

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

56
56
53
55

Dissn Wgted ave

n/a
50.6

Rounded
51

Example 5 is about compensation at the end of the taught programme. The weighted
average mark > 50, but there are 40 credits of fail. However, all the marks are above
40 and there are no core modules, so under Convention 35 these would be
compensated. Provided the student passes the dissertation s/he is still eligible for the
award of an MA/MSc. In this case a mark of 50 would be used on the compensated
modules to determine the level of award to be made. (Conventions 35, 56)
Example 6
Mod 1
42

Modules 1-6 are core

Mod 2
44

Mod 3
52

Mod 4
45

Progression decision at end of taught programme

Mod 5
45

Mod 6
52

Mod 7
52

Mod 8
55

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

56
56
53
55

Dissn Wgted ave

n/a
50.6

Rounded
51

Example 6 is the same as example 5, except that the failed modules are core. This
prevents them from being compensated. The candidate must therefore resit the
failed modules and has one resit opportunity for up to 40 credits under Convention
47. The Board could use its discretion to allow the student to proceed despite the
modules being core under Conventions 35 and 42, but the student would then only
be eligible as of right for the award of a Pass (Convention 57).

Example 7
Mod 1
42

No core modules
Mod 2
44

Mod 3
52

Mod 4
45

Progression decision at end of taught programme

Mod 5
45

Mod 6
52

Mod 7
44

Mod 8
35

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

52
56
53
55

Dissn Wgted ave

n/a
47.9

Rounded
48

This candidate has failed 60 credits of the taught programme and has one mark <
40. Under convention 47 the candidate has no automatic right to resit, but could do
so with the support of the Chair of the Board (Convention 47). If resits are not
permitted, the BoE would need to consider awarding a PGCert (Convention 66)

Example 8

No core modules

Mod 1
42

Mod 2
44

50

50

Mod 3 Mod 4 Mod 5 Mod 6 Mod 7 Mod 8 Mod 9

52
45
45
52
50
50
52
Marks amended after exercise of compensation
52
50
50
52
50
50
52

Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

56
53
55
56

53

55

Dissn Wgted ave

45
48.1
45

49.4

Rounded
48
49

The weighted average is < 50, but within two marks, so the exercise of discretion
should be considered under Convention 60. The marginal failures in the 40 credits
of taught modules must have been compensated and for calculation purposes are
treated as 50. However, there are 60 credits of fail in the dissertation, so we need to
consider whether discretion should be exercised to award a postgraduate diploma or
a postgraduate certificate under Conventions 63 and 66. If the programme had
specific regulations for these awards we would refer to them, but assuming there
arent, we revert to the general rules. There are enough credits for the PG Diploma,
and for these 120 credits the weighted average mark > 50, so the Board may award
a PG Diploma.

Example 9
Mod 1
62

No core modules
Mod 2
53

Mod 3
50

Mod 4
50

Mod 5
64

Mod 6
64

Mod 7
54

Mod 8
51

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12 Dissn Wgted ave

54
54
52
53
62
57.4

Rounded
57

The weighted average is 57.4%, so that the weighted average is

rounded to 57 and the candidate is not eligible for the exercise of
discretion under Convention 60. However, this is very close to 57.5
and there are 90 credits of merit level work, including the dissertation,
so the Board could use its broader discretion under Convention 43 to
award a merit.

Example 10
No core modules
Semester 1
Mod 1
Mod 2 Mod 3 Mod 4
51
53
50
50

Mod 5
51

Semester 2
Mod 6 Mod 7 Mod 8
52
58
60

Mod 9 Mod 10 Mod 11 Mod 12

60
61
62
61

Dissn Wgted ave

60
57.2

Rounded
57

PECC level 2 support for semester 1

The weighted average is 57.2, rounded to 57, and therefore does not require
consideration of a higher award under Convention 609. However, there is mitigating
evidence which the Board must note and a recommendation from the PEC
Committee that semester 1 modules had been moderately affected by illness or
personal circumstances. Discretion can be considered under Convention 53 in cases
where the weighted average mark is more than two marks below a boundary and
there is mitigating evidence. Clearly semester 2 work was noticeably better than
semester 1 work and there is therefore a case for exercising discretion on the
grounds of the mitigating evidence. The difference in performance between the
semesters lends support to the notion that the circumstances did adversely affect the
student in semester 1 and that the marks are not a fair reflection of the students
ability. (Convention 54a)