dissertation pass mark

• Home »
• Advice »
• Masters Study Advice

find your perfect postgrad program Search our Database of 30,000 Courses

Masters degree grades.

A typical masters degree will be graded using four terms:

• Distinction: a final grade of 70% or above
• Merit: a final grade of 60-69%
• Pass: a final grade of 50-59%
• Borderline pass/fail: a final grade of 40-49%

In the UK, masters degrees are usually graded in a different way to bachelors degrees, with the system being Distinction, Merit and Pass rather than 1st, 2.1, 2.2 and 3rd.

This table illustrates approximately how the two different grading systems can be compared:

However, although masters degree grades are usually different to undergraduate degree grades, this does depends on what masters course you are studying. Here, we’ll look at the most common three:

Integrated masters degree grades

An integrated masters is one that follows directly on from your undergraduate course. This is most common in the sciences , where you apply for a four year course in your chosen subject and then in your second year make a decision on whether to follow the path to a BSc or to an MChem, MPhys, etc.

This is graded like an undergraduate degree, in that the classification you receive will be either;

First (1st);

Second class honours upper division (2.1);

Second class honours lower division (2.2);

Third (3rd) or;

In these cases, the later stages of study are weighted more than the earlier.

Standalone masters degree grades

Taught masters degree.

Taught masters degrees require 180 credits worth of work, made of a combination of taught modules, projects and a dissertation. The individual masters modules are usually worth between 10 and 30 credits each, depending on their length and the amount of assessment required. In some cases taught masters are merely graded as a pass or fail, but commonly taught masters degree grades are fail, pass, merit (or credit) and distinction. The boundaries for this are usually 50% for a pass, 60% for a merit and 70% for a distinction, as the above table illustrates. This masters degree grading system will be covered in greater detail later. 

Masters degree by research

A masters by research (an MPhil or MRes, and sometimes MLitt) is usually graded as pass or fail, with occasional universities offering distinction as a classification as well.

Masters grading system in the UK

The final masters grade is based on a ‘weighted’ score. For an integrated masters, this means your marks in your final two years are worth more than in your first two. 

On other masters courses , it can depend on which proportion of the mark is made up by taught aspects or research aspects. In general though, as well as having to aim for a certain weighted average, you also need to have marks within a certain range. Generally, this means for a pass, no marks under 40; a merit, none below 50; and for a distinction, none below 60.

If your course involves a dissertation, the mark that you achieve for this will also impact your final masters grade. Often, to achieve a certain classification, you are required to achieve that mark as minimum on your dissertation, for example, for a merit, your dissertation needs to score 60 or above, and for a distinction, 70 or above. If this sounds intimidating, try not to worry, we have plenty of helpful advice for you from writing your dissertation proposal to various ways to avoid dissertation drama .

Whilst these classifications are pretty much standard, they do vary between courses as well as between universities, so do check out your particular university and find out how it works out its masters degree grades. Some universities, whilst sticking to the pass/merit/distinction boundaries for their final grades, may use a variety of ways to mark your work throughout the year – percentages, letter grades (A, B, C, etc), so do make sure you know how it all adds up!

Also, remember that university guidelines, whilst strict, do have an element of leniency. Often there is a boundary (commonly 2% under) that if your final average is in, you may be able to persuade yourself up a class! This is most common if you excelled on your dissertation, but perhaps were let down by an earlier taught module. So don’t be afraid to ask.

Pass, merit and distinction

As an estimate of what quality of work you’re looking for, take a look at some example guidelines below:

Again, these are general guidelines, and looking at your particular university will give you much more specific information on their masters grades. If it all looks a bit much, don’t worry – we have a guide on how to get a first class postgraduate degree here .

You may have noticed that, despite the official classifications being distinction, merit and pass, that there is a tendency towards continuing with undergraduate language. This is because they roughly match up –  a first is roughly a distinction, a second class honours, upper division a merit, and a second class honours, lower division a pass. This can be helpful to bear in mind when thinking about masters degree grades, as, after all by this stage you should have a great understanding of how the undergraduate system works!

Masters degree assessments

Masters degrees are assessed in various different ways to determine the student’s overall grade – methods of assessment can include coursework , essays , presentations and exams . These will all be used to evaluate the masters student understanding of their core subject. Practical placements and internships may also contribute to the masters degree grading in certain subjects.

Assessment weighting is likely to differ for each module of the course, which means that some assessments may carry different significance than others. For instance, a module might comprise an exam and coursework, each contributing 50% to the final grade. In such a scenario, if a student scored 65% in the exam and 55% in the coursework, the module's final grade would be 60%. In other modules the overall assessment could be a smaller proportion of the final masters degree grade.

Apply for one of our x5 bursaries worth £2,000

We've launched our new Postgrad Solutions Study Bursaries for 2024. Full-time, part-time, online and blended-learning students eligible. 2024 & 2025 January start dates students welcome. Study postgraduate courses in any subject taught anywhere worldwide.

How can you get a distinction in your masters degree?

1.  High academic standards throughout – aim to achieve consistently high grades across all modules and assessments from the very start and strive to excel in all aspects of your academic work. Make sure you produce high-quality coursework assignments, essays, reports and projects that all demonstrate critical thinking, originality and depth of analysis.

2.  Engagement and participation – actively participate in class discussions, seminars and group projects. Engage with course materials beyond the required readings to ensure you to gain a thorough understanding of the subject matter.

3.  Conduct independent research – be sure to conduct independent research and produce original research papers or a dissertation that contributes new insights to your chosen field.

4.  Networking and collaboration – try and build professional relationships with faculty members, fellow students and professionals in your field. You can do this by collaborating on research projects, attending conferences and engaging in academic and professional networking opportunities.

5.  Feedback and improvement – actively seek feedback from your supervisors and lecturers, as well your peers, then incorporate their suggestions for improvement into your work.

6.  Demonstrate leadership and initiative – take on leadership roles in group projects and participate in relevant extracurricular activities. Show initiative in pursuing opportunities for professional development, internships and/or research grants.

7.  Be organised and manage time effectively – develop strong organisational and time-management skills, prioritising tasks and ensuring you allocate sufficient time for studying, research and preparation.

What if you are failing your masters degree?

1. Retake a module to bring your masters grades up

As previously discussed, a masters degree is divided up into several modules, which are usually are worth between 10 and 30 credits each. If you’ve only failed one or two modules there is likely to be the opportunity to re-sit some assessments within these modules to increase your overall masters grade.

2. Revise your dissertation to improve your grades

 If you fail your dissertation, contact your supervisor to see if you can submit a revised version later in the year. If this is allowed it could be enough to raise your overall masters degree grade.

3. Switch to a Postgrad Certificate or a Postgrad Diploma

If your masters program is going completely wrong and you are almost certainly going to fail, there may still be a chance of you achieving a different postgraduate qualification, for example a Postgraduate Certificate or Postgraduate Diploma . These PG qualifications require less credits to complete than a masters degree, and by achieving one of these you can rest assured that your postgraduate studies were not in vain!

4. Re-sit exams or extend deadlines for extenuating circumstances

If your academic achievement (or lack of it) has been affected by extenuating circumstances – such as illness or bereavement – speak to your supervisor as soon as possible as they may allow you to submit your dissertation at a later date or re-sit some exams before submitting your work to the official examining board.

5. Submit an appeal for a remark

Finally, if you feel that the official examining board’s grade is an unfair reflection of your work, you may be able to submit an appeal for a remark.

Questions about the masters grading system

How are masters degrees graded in the uk.

Everything at masters level is double-blind marked, so two of your lecturers or tutors will mark your work and then agree on the grade between them. It depends on the assignment and how it is presented as a piece of work, as an essay or an exam will be marked differently from a presentation.

Is a masters grade the same around the world?

A masters degree has the same weighting across Europe as European universities have agreed that all university qualifications are worth the same number of credits. This means that the qualifications are transferable all over Europe . Generally, the same can be said for many other countries, especially in the English-speaking world, but if you are planning on continuing your education in another country, you should check with the institution you are planning on attending with regards to the transferability of your qualifications. See the section below for further information about how the grading systems work in the United States and Europe.

Do grades matter at masters level?

At postgraduate level, there is more emphasis on the content of your essays and research rather than on the masters grades you received. If you are planning on moving into a specific field of work after you graduate, then you should ensure that the modules you study and essays you write are all geared towards that field. The only time the grade truly matters is if you are considering a PhD after completing the masters program. However, showing that you have improved your skills across the course is just as important as getting the best grades right from the start.

What else is important?

Once you get into searching for a job you will quickly realise that extra-curricular activities and work experience are just as important as your masters grades, as is trying to meet the right people through networking. Showing you can work efficiently and are a self-reliant person is an important addition to your CV.

How many people have a masters degree in the US?

Here’s a table showing the percentage of adults over the age of 25 with a masters degree in the United States.

Masters grading in other countries

Masters grades are calculated differently across the world – here is a brief overview on the grading systems used in the United States and Europe.

Masters degree grades in the USA

In the United States, universities employ the Grade Point Average (GPA) system to evaluate students' academic performance in masters degrees. Under this system, students receive a grade on a four-point decimal scale for each assignment or assessment they complete. The accumulated points from all coursework are then added up and divided by the number of courses or assessments completed, and this gives the final GPA score. Unlike grading methods in other countries, the GPA system calculates the final grade continuously as students progress through their course. While the highest GPA score achievable is 4.0, maintaining such a perfect score throughout a full masters degree program is very difficult. Typically, a GPA of 3.67 or higher in a masters program is considered equivalent to achieving a Distinction in the UK.

Masters degree grades in Europe

Most universities in Europe use the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) for masters degree grading. The ECTS assigns values to courses and/or modules, and each course has clearly defined learning outcomes and grades available. Although HEIs in different European countries use different grading systems, the ECTS facilitates the portability of academic qualifications, enabling credits to be easily transferred between institutions and countries within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) if the student moves between institutions, for example if they are on the Erasmus scheme.

Related articles

What Is A Masters Degree?

Postgraduate Taught vs Research Masters

What Is A GPA?

Postgrad Solutions Study Bursaries

Exclusive bursaries Open day alerts Funding advice Application tips Latest PG news

Sign up now!

Take 2 minutes to sign up to PGS student services and reap the benefits…

• The chance to apply for one of our 5 PGS Bursaries worth £2,000 each
• Fantastic scholarship updates
• Latest PG news sent directly to you.

How To Write A Dissertation Or Thesis

8 straightforward steps to craft an a-grade dissertation.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) Expert Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2020

Writing a dissertation or thesis is not a simple task. It takes time, energy and a lot of will power to get you across the finish line. It’s not easy – but it doesn’t necessarily need to be a painful process. If you understand the big-picture process of how to write a dissertation or thesis, your research journey will be a lot smoother.  

In this post, I’m going to outline the big-picture process of how to write a high-quality dissertation or thesis, without losing your mind along the way. If you’re just starting your research, this post is perfect for you. Alternatively, if you’ve already submitted your proposal, this article which covers how to structure a dissertation might be more helpful.

How To Write A Dissertation: 8 Steps

• Clearly understand what a dissertation (or thesis) is
• Find a unique and valuable research topic
• Craft a convincing research proposal
• Write up a strong introduction chapter
• Review the existing literature and compile a literature review
• Design a rigorous research strategy and undertake your own research
• Present the findings of your research
• Draw a conclusion and discuss the implications

Step 1: Understand exactly what a dissertation is

This probably sounds like a no-brainer, but all too often, students come to us for help with their research and the underlying issue is that they don’t fully understand what a dissertation (or thesis) actually is.

So, what is a dissertation?

At its simplest, a dissertation or thesis is a formal piece of research , reflecting the standard research process . But what is the standard research process, you ask? The research process involves 4 key steps:

• Ask a very specific, well-articulated question (s) (your research topic)
• See what other researchers have said about it (if they’ve already answered it)
• If they haven’t answered it adequately, undertake your own data collection and analysis in a scientifically rigorous fashion
• Answer your original question(s), based on your analysis findings

In short, the research process is simply about asking and answering questions in a systematic fashion . This probably sounds pretty obvious, but people often think they’ve done “research”, when in fact what they have done is:

• Started with a vague, poorly articulated question
• Not taken the time to see what research has already been done regarding the question
• Collected data and opinions that support their gut and undertaken a flimsy analysis
• Drawn a shaky conclusion, based on that analysis

If you want to see the perfect example of this in action, look out for the next Facebook post where someone claims they’ve done “research”… All too often, people consider reading a few blog posts to constitute research. Its no surprise then that what they end up with is an opinion piece, not research. Okay, okay – I’ll climb off my soapbox now.

The key takeaway here is that a dissertation (or thesis) is a formal piece of research, reflecting the research process. It’s not an opinion piece , nor a place to push your agenda or try to convince someone of your position. Writing a good dissertation involves asking a question and taking a systematic, rigorous approach to answering it.

If you understand this and are comfortable leaving your opinions or preconceived ideas at the door, you’re already off to a good start!

Step 2: Find a unique, valuable research topic

As we saw, the first step of the research process is to ask a specific, well-articulated question. In other words, you need to find a research topic that asks a specific question or set of questions (these are called research questions ). Sounds easy enough, right? All you’ve got to do is identify a question or two and you’ve got a winning research topic. Well, not quite…

A good dissertation or thesis topic has a few important attributes. Specifically, a solid research topic should be:

Let’s take a closer look at these:

Attribute #1: Clear

Your research topic needs to be crystal clear about what you’re planning to research, what you want to know, and within what context. There shouldn’t be any ambiguity or vagueness about what you’ll research.

Here’s an example of a clearly articulated research topic:

An analysis of consumer-based factors influencing organisational trust in British low-cost online equity brokerage firms.

As you can see in the example, its crystal clear what will be analysed (factors impacting organisational trust), amongst who (consumers) and in what context (British low-cost equity brokerage firms, based online).

Need a helping hand?

Attribute #2:   Unique

Your research should be asking a question(s) that hasn’t been asked before, or that hasn’t been asked in a specific context (for example, in a specific country or industry).

For example, sticking organisational trust topic above, it’s quite likely that organisational trust factors in the UK have been investigated before, but the context (online low-cost equity brokerages) could make this research unique. Therefore, the context makes this research original.

One caveat when using context as the basis for originality – you need to have a good reason to suspect that your findings in this context might be different from the existing research – otherwise, there’s no reason to warrant researching it.

Attribute #3: Important

Simply asking a unique or original question is not enough – the question needs to create value. In other words, successfully answering your research questions should provide some value to the field of research or the industry. You can’t research something just to satisfy your curiosity. It needs to make some form of contribution either to research or industry.

For example, researching the factors influencing consumer trust would create value by enabling businesses to tailor their operations and marketing to leverage factors that promote trust. In other words, it would have a clear benefit to industry.

So, how do you go about finding a unique and valuable research topic? We explain that in detail in this video post – How To Find A Research Topic . Yeah, we’ve got you covered 😊

Step 3: Write a convincing research proposal

Once you’ve pinned down a high-quality research topic, the next step is to convince your university to let you research it. No matter how awesome you think your topic is, it still needs to get the rubber stamp before you can move forward with your research. The research proposal is the tool you’ll use for this job.

So, what’s in a research proposal?

The main “job” of a research proposal is to convince your university, advisor or committee that your research topic is worthy of approval. But convince them of what? Well, this varies from university to university, but generally, they want to see that:

• You have a clearly articulated, unique and important topic (this might sound familiar…)
• You’ve done some initial reading of the existing literature relevant to your topic (i.e. a literature review)
• You have a provisional plan in terms of how you will collect data and analyse it (i.e. a methodology)

At the proposal stage, it’s (generally) not expected that you’ve extensively reviewed the existing literature , but you will need to show that you’ve done enough reading to identify a clear gap for original (unique) research. Similarly, they generally don’t expect that you have a rock-solid research methodology mapped out, but you should have an idea of whether you’ll be undertaking qualitative or quantitative analysis , and how you’ll collect your data (we’ll discuss this in more detail later).

Long story short – don’t stress about having every detail of your research meticulously thought out at the proposal stage – this will develop as you progress through your research. However, you do need to show that you’ve “done your homework” and that your research is worthy of approval .

So, how do you go about crafting a high-quality, convincing proposal? We cover that in detail in this video post – How To Write A Top-Class Research Proposal . We’ve also got a video walkthrough of two proposal examples here .

Step 4: Craft a strong introduction chapter

Once your proposal’s been approved, its time to get writing your actual dissertation or thesis! The good news is that if you put the time into crafting a high-quality proposal, you’ve already got a head start on your first three chapters – introduction, literature review and methodology – as you can use your proposal as the basis for these.

Handy sidenote – our free dissertation & thesis template is a great way to speed up your dissertation writing journey.

What’s the introduction chapter all about?

The purpose of the introduction chapter is to set the scene for your research (dare I say, to introduce it…) so that the reader understands what you’ll be researching and why it’s important. In other words, it covers the same ground as the research proposal in that it justifies your research topic.

What goes into the introduction chapter?

This can vary slightly between universities and degrees, but generally, the introduction chapter will include the following:

• A brief background to the study, explaining the overall area of research
• A problem statement , explaining what the problem is with the current state of research (in other words, where the knowledge gap exists)
• Your research questions – in other words, the specific questions your study will seek to answer (based on the knowledge gap)
• The significance of your study – in other words, why it’s important and how its findings will be useful in the world

As you can see, this all about explaining the “what” and the “why” of your research (as opposed to the “how”). So, your introduction chapter is basically the salesman of your study, “selling” your research to the first-time reader and (hopefully) getting them interested to read more.

How do I write the introduction chapter, you ask? We cover that in detail in this post .

Step 5: Undertake an in-depth literature review

As I mentioned earlier, you’ll need to do some initial review of the literature in Steps 2 and 3 to find your research gap and craft a convincing research proposal – but that’s just scratching the surface. Once you reach the literature review stage of your dissertation or thesis, you need to dig a lot deeper into the existing research and write up a comprehensive literature review chapter.

What’s the literature review all about?

There are two main stages in the literature review process:

Literature Review Step 1: Reading up

The first stage is for you to deep dive into the existing literature (journal articles, textbook chapters, industry reports, etc) to gain an in-depth understanding of the current state of research regarding your topic. While you don’t need to read every single article, you do need to ensure that you cover all literature that is related to your core research questions, and create a comprehensive catalogue of that literature , which you’ll use in the next step.

Reading and digesting all the relevant literature is a time consuming and intellectually demanding process. Many students underestimate just how much work goes into this step, so make sure that you allocate a good amount of time for this when planning out your research. Thankfully, there are ways to fast track the process – be sure to check out this article covering how to read journal articles quickly .

Literature Review Step 2: Writing up

Once you’ve worked through the literature and digested it all, you’ll need to write up your literature review chapter. Many students make the mistake of thinking that the literature review chapter is simply a summary of what other researchers have said. While this is partly true, a literature review is much more than just a summary. To pull off a good literature review chapter, you’ll need to achieve at least 3 things:

• You need to synthesise the existing research , not just summarise it. In other words, you need to show how different pieces of theory fit together, what’s agreed on by researchers, what’s not.
• You need to highlight a research gap that your research is going to fill. In other words, you’ve got to outline the problem so that your research topic can provide a solution.
• You need to use the existing research to inform your methodology and approach to your own research design. For example, you might use questions or Likert scales from previous studies in your your own survey design .

As you can see, a good literature review is more than just a summary of the published research. It’s the foundation on which your own research is built, so it deserves a lot of love and attention. Take the time to craft a comprehensive literature review with a suitable structure .

But, how do I actually write the literature review chapter, you ask? We cover that in detail in this video post .

Step 6: Carry out your own research

Once you’ve completed your literature review and have a sound understanding of the existing research, its time to develop your own research (finally!). You’ll design this research specifically so that you can find the answers to your unique research question.

There are two steps here – designing your research strategy and executing on it:

1 – Design your research strategy

The first step is to design your research strategy and craft a methodology chapter . I won’t get into the technicalities of the methodology chapter here, but in simple terms, this chapter is about explaining the “how” of your research. If you recall, the introduction and literature review chapters discussed the “what” and the “why”, so it makes sense that the next point to cover is the “how” –that’s what the methodology chapter is all about.

In this section, you’ll need to make firm decisions about your research design. This includes things like:

• Your research philosophy (e.g. positivism or interpretivism )
• Your overall methodology (e.g. qualitative , quantitative or mixed methods)
• Your data collection strategy (e.g. interviews , focus groups, surveys)
• Your data analysis strategy (e.g. content analysis , correlation analysis, regression)

If these words have got your head spinning, don’t worry! We’ll explain these in plain language in other posts. It’s not essential that you understand the intricacies of research design (yet!). The key takeaway here is that you’ll need to make decisions about how you’ll design your own research, and you’ll need to describe (and justify) your decisions in your methodology chapter.

2 – Execute: Collect and analyse your data

Once you’ve worked out your research design, you’ll put it into action and start collecting your data. This might mean undertaking interviews, hosting an online survey or any other data collection method. Data collection can take quite a bit of time (especially if you host in-person interviews), so be sure to factor sufficient time into your project plan for this. Oftentimes, things don’t go 100% to plan (for example, you don’t get as many survey responses as you hoped for), so bake a little extra time into your budget here.

Once you’ve collected your data, you’ll need to do some data preparation before you can sink your teeth into the analysis. For example:

• If you carry out interviews or focus groups, you’ll need to transcribe your audio data to text (i.e. a Word document).
• If you collect quantitative survey data, you’ll need to clean up your data and get it into the right format for whichever analysis software you use (for example, SPSS, R or STATA).

Once you’ve completed your data prep, you’ll undertake your analysis, using the techniques that you described in your methodology. Depending on what you find in your analysis, you might also do some additional forms of analysis that you hadn’t planned for. For example, you might see something in the data that raises new questions or that requires clarification with further analysis.

The type(s) of analysis that you’ll use depend entirely on the nature of your research and your research questions. For example:

• If your research if exploratory in nature, you’ll often use qualitative analysis techniques .
• If your research is confirmatory in nature, you’ll often use quantitative analysis techniques
• If your research involves a mix of both, you might use a mixed methods approach

Again, if these words have got your head spinning, don’t worry! We’ll explain these concepts and techniques in other posts. The key takeaway is simply that there’s no “one size fits all” for research design and methodology – it all depends on your topic, your research questions and your data. So, don’t be surprised if your study colleagues take a completely different approach to yours.

Step 7: Present your findings

Once you’ve completed your analysis, it’s time to present your findings (finally!). In a dissertation or thesis, you’ll typically present your findings in two chapters – the results chapter and the discussion chapter .

What’s the difference between the results chapter and the discussion chapter?

While these two chapters are similar, the results chapter generally just presents the processed data neatly and clearly without interpretation, while the discussion chapter explains the story the data are telling  – in other words, it provides your interpretation of the results.

For example, if you were researching the factors that influence consumer trust, you might have used a quantitative approach to identify the relationship between potential factors (e.g. perceived integrity and competence of the organisation) and consumer trust. In this case:

• Your results chapter would just present the results of the statistical tests. For example, correlation results or differences between groups. In other words, the processed numbers.
• Your discussion chapter would explain what the numbers mean in relation to your research question(s). For example, Factor 1 has a weak relationship with consumer trust, while Factor 2 has a strong relationship.

Depending on the university and degree, these two chapters (results and discussion) are sometimes merged into one , so be sure to check with your institution what their preference is. Regardless of the chapter structure, this section is about presenting the findings of your research in a clear, easy to understand fashion.

Importantly, your discussion here needs to link back to your research questions (which you outlined in the introduction or literature review chapter). In other words, it needs to answer the key questions you asked (or at least attempt to answer them).

For example, if we look at the sample research topic:

In this case, the discussion section would clearly outline which factors seem to have a noteworthy influence on organisational trust. By doing so, they are answering the overarching question and fulfilling the purpose of the research .

For more information about the results chapter , check out this post for qualitative studies and this post for quantitative studies .

Step 8: The Final Step Draw a conclusion and discuss the implications

Last but not least, you’ll need to wrap up your research with the conclusion chapter . In this chapter, you’ll bring your research full circle by highlighting the key findings of your study and explaining what the implications of these findings are.

What exactly are key findings? The key findings are those findings which directly relate to your original research questions and overall research objectives (which you discussed in your introduction chapter). The implications, on the other hand, explain what your findings mean for industry, or for research in your area.

Sticking with the consumer trust topic example, the conclusion might look something like this:

Key findings

This study set out to identify which factors influence consumer-based trust in British low-cost online equity brokerage firms. The results suggest that the following factors have a large impact on consumer trust:

While the following factors have a very limited impact on consumer trust:

Notably, within the 25-30 age groups, Factors E had a noticeably larger impact, which may be explained by…

Implications

The findings having noteworthy implications for British low-cost online equity brokers. Specifically:

The large impact of Factors X and Y implies that brokers need to consider….

The limited impact of Factor E implies that brokers need to…

As you can see, the conclusion chapter is basically explaining the “what” (what your study found) and the “so what?” (what the findings mean for the industry or research). This brings the study full circle and closes off the document.

Let’s recap – how to write a dissertation or thesis

You’re still with me? Impressive! I know that this post was a long one, but hopefully you’ve learnt a thing or two about how to write a dissertation or thesis, and are now better equipped to start your own research.

To recap, the 8 steps to writing a quality dissertation (or thesis) are as follows:

• Understand what a dissertation (or thesis) is – a research project that follows the research process.
• Find a unique (original) and important research topic
• Craft a convincing dissertation or thesis research proposal
• Write a clear, compelling introduction chapter
• Undertake a thorough review of the existing research and write up a literature review
• Undertake your own research
• Present and interpret your findings

Once you’ve wrapped up the core chapters, all that’s typically left is the abstract , reference list and appendices. As always, be sure to check with your university if they have any additional requirements in terms of structure or content.  

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

20 Comments

thankfull >>>this is very useful

Thank you, it was really helpful

unquestionably, this amazing simplified way of teaching. Really , I couldn’t find in the literature words that fully explicit my great thanks to you. However, I could only say thanks a-lot.

Great to hear that – thanks for the feedback. Good luck writing your dissertation/thesis.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of how to write a dissertation. Many thanks for sharing it free of charge.

Very rich presentation. Thank you

Thanks Derek Jansen|GRADCOACH, I find it very useful guide to arrange my activities and proceed to research!

Thank you so much for such a marvelous teaching .I am so convinced that am going to write a comprehensive and a distinct masters dissertation

It is an amazing comprehensive explanation

This was straightforward. Thank you!

I can say that your explanations are simple and enlightening – understanding what you have done here is easy for me. Could you write more about the different types of research methods specific to the three methodologies: quan, qual and MM. I look forward to interacting with this website more in the future.

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions 🙂

Hello, your write ups is quite educative. However, l have challenges in going about my research questions which is below; *Building the enablers of organisational growth through effective governance and purposeful leadership.*

Very educating.

Just listening to the name of the dissertation makes the student nervous. As writing a top-quality dissertation is a difficult task as it is a lengthy topic, requires a lot of research and understanding and is usually around 10,000 to 15000 words. Sometimes due to studies, unbalanced workload or lack of research and writing skill students look for dissertation submission from professional writers.

Thank you 💕😊 very much. I was confused but your comprehensive explanation has cleared my doubts of ever presenting a good thesis. Thank you.

thank you so much, that was so useful

Hi. Where is the excel spread sheet ark?

could you please help me look at your thesis paper to enable me to do the portion that has to do with the specification

my topic is “the impact of domestic revenue mobilization.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Mathematics Institute

Msc dissertations, mathematics dissertations.

The MSc dissertation counts for 90 CATS - that is, half of the total MSc load.

A dissertation is usually expository, collecting together results from several research papers into a coherent whole. Sometimes dissertations contain original research, and this is encouraged where appropriate. The general framework of a dissertation must be approved by the supervisor. This page may help to find staff members with interesting topics.

The appropriate length for a dissertation will vary with the topic, the formatting, and whether or not it includes figures, etc. As a guide, most MSc dissertations are between 30 and 50 A4 pages, double spaced, with normal font size and margins. Longer dissertations are not necessarily better, and the marks obtained depend much more on the quality of the content (especially the mathematics) than on the number of words. It is essential that the dissertation is well presented.

The dissertation should normally be produced in TEX or LaTEX. The package here is intended for PhD theses, but it can also be used for MSc dissertations. Suitable past dissertations are available for inspection. If you are in any doubt, please consult your supervisor or the Director of the MSc.

Interdisciplinary Mathematics Dissertations

For MSc Interdisciplinary Mathematics candidates the above holds, although these dissertations may be longer if they contain many diagrams, data or programs for example. The level of sophistication of the mathematics used in the dissertation may be lower than that expected in a straight Mathematics MSc provided that the dissertation demonstrates a compensating degree of understanding of the role or appropriate use of the mathematics described. The mathematics in the dissertation should be correct, appropriate for the interdisciplinary topic under discussion, and should say something of scientific value. This page may help to find staff members in the math dept with interesting topics.

Dissertation Marks

The dissertation is read by two internal examiners (including a supervisor) who report to the Examination Board. For MSc Interdisciplinary Mathematics dissertations, reports are generally requested from an internal examiner in each of the relevant departments to ensure sufficient interdisciplinary quality.

Examiners are asked to discuss the dissertation under the headings: Accuracy and depth of understanding (40%); Level of difficulty and degree of originality (40%); Exposition (10%); Context/Literature Bibliography (10%). The marks are passed to the Examination Board. The external examiner reviews the dissertations and marks prior to the Examination Board meeting.

The dissertation pass mark is 50% and students must pass the dissertation in order to pass the MSc.

Submitting your Dissertation or Postgraduate Diploma Project

The submission deadline is 2nd September 2024. Submissions will be made via Moodle. Further details will be provided closer to the deadline.

The name of the candidate's supervisor must be stated on the title page of the dissertation. The introduction to the dissertation should state clearly all sources used, and should pinpoint clearly any original passages claimed. The candidate should briefly describe how the sources were used and their relation to the dissertation. Acknowledgements should also appear, where appropriate, in the body of the dissertation. References with precise bibliographic details should be included. A dissertation will not be accepted if any reader (including one unfamiliar with the contents of the references cited) could gain a mistaken impression that expository material is the candidate's own original work.

Good English style, with correct grammar and spelling, is expected. The books Writing Mathematics Well by L. Gillman, and How to Write Mathematics by N.E. Steenrod et al. (AMS 1973) are recommended. (Both can be found in the Library catalogue .) In addition, supervisors can often help by suggesting which published mathematical papers are good models of exposition, and which are not.

Postgraduate Diploma Project

The expected standard in a Postgraduate Diploma is less than that for an MSc degree. If a candidate is recommended to transfer to the Postgraduate Diploma as a result of their examination results, the candidate will need to write a (Diploma) project rather than a dissertation. Students on the 2 year MSc course will submit a project at the end of their first year

The Diploma project counts for 24 CATS (rather than 90 CATS for an MSc dissertation). It is usually an expository work describing a piece of mathematics (which may be related to material covered in lectures). Sometimes a project may involve numerical work or a guided exploration of some particular problem. The project should normally be about 10-20 pages long and should show that the candidate is capable of writing about mathematics in a coherent fashion. The general framework of the project must be approved by the supervisor. The project is marked against these criteria and not against that for the MSc.

Academic Manual

• 7. Classification

Section 7: Classification

Published for 2023-24

7.1 Overarching Principles

7.2 calculating classifications, 7.2.1 averages and rounding, 7.2.2 classification year mean (ug programmes only), 7.2.3 weighting of reassessment and deferral marks , 7.2.4 credit awarded via the recognition of prior learning (rpl) , 7.2.5 pass / fail degrees , 7.2.6 study abroad and placements  , 7.2.7 academic partnerships, 7.3 pre-honours classification scheme , 7.4    honours degree classification scheme, 7.4.1 general principles , 7.4.2 honours classification scheme a , 7.4.3 honours classification scheme b , 7.4.4 honours classification scheme c , 7.4.5 determination of honours classifications , 7.5 graduate classification scheme , 7.6 taught postgraduate classification scheme , 7.7 research masters (mres) classification scheme , 7.8 non-modular programmes  , 7.8.1 ba (hons) english , 7.8.2 ba (hons) fine art , 7.8.3 bfa (hons) fine art , 7.8.4 mbbs (bachelor of medicine, bachelor of surgery), 7.8.5 ma fine art , 7.8.6 mfa fine art in the slade school of fine art, advice for students.

Further information and advice for students about assessment is available on the  Examinations & Awards webpages .

Recent Changes

A guide to changes to the regulations are available from the  Recent Changes  page.

Browser does not support script.

We use cookies on this site. By browsing our site you agree to our use of cookies. Close this message Find out more

• Find your course
• The Principal
• Our experts
• Our history
• Facts & figures
• Art Collections & Picture Gallery
• Exhibitions
• Online shop
• Organisation of the College
• Charitable status
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Research degrees
• Scholarships
• Accommodation
• Guide for parents
• Schools & colleges
• Lifelong learning
• Passport Award
• Discover Arts
• Discover Science
• Careers & Employability
• Departments and Schools
• Biological Sciences
• Comparative Literature & Culture
• Computer Science
• Drama,Theatre & Dance
• Earth Sciences
• Electronic Engineering
• European Studies
• Information Security
• Liberal Arts
• Mathematics
• Modern Languages, Literatures & Cultures
• Politics & International Relations
• Professional Studies
• Social Work
• Student life
• Campus & facilities
• Social life
• Royal Holloway and Me
• What our students say
• Student media
• Students' Union
• Active lifestyle & sport
• Volunteering
• Support, health & welfare
• Jobs while you study
• Sustainability
• International
• Why Royal Holloway?
• English language & university preparation
• Study abroad & exchanges
• Immigration & visas
• Your country
• Fees & scholarships
• After applying
• Support for international students
• Information for agents
• Virtual Open Day
• Current research
• Doctoral School
• Impact case studies
• Research support
• Funding opportunities
• Departments & Groups
• Pure support
• Commercialisation seed funds
• Research data management
• For business
• The Institute for Cyber Security Innovation
• Conferences & hospitality
• Consultancy
• Enterprise centre / incubation
• Licensing / commercialisation
• Research & business
• Recruiting our students
• Proof of award
• Get involved
• Benefits & services
• Events & reunions
• Higher magazine
• Why support the College?
• Our priorities
• A gift in your will
• American Foundation
• Tax efficient giving

Dissertation - Marking Criteria

The text below is an extract from the MSc handbook for students

Each dissertation is independently marked by two examiners; one of these is normally the supervisor. An external examiner moderates the assessment. The examiners may conduct an oral examination if they wish to check the depth of the student's understanding and to ensure that the dissertation is the student's own work. Students must obtain a pass grade on the dissertation to pass the MSc degree. The examiners give up to 100 points where the points translate to the following categories:

85 − 100:   An exceptionally high level of understanding and outstanding  research potential.

70 − 84.99:   Very high competence and excellent research potential.

60 − 69.99:   Evidence of some creativity and independence of thought.

50 − 59.99:   Sound understanding of the literature, but lack of accuracy or originality.

0 − 49.99:   Insufficient or no understanding of the topic, poor quality of work.  

The points are given according to the following guidelines:

Knowledge of subject (25)

21 − 25:   Deep understanding and near-comprehensive knowledge.

18 − 20:   Deep understanding.

15 − 17:   Very good understanding.

12 − 14:   Sound knowledge of relevant information.

10 − 11:   Basic understanding of the main issues.

0 − 9:   Little or no understanding of the main issues.

Organisation of material (25)

21 − 25:   Of publishable quality.

18 − 20:   Arguments clearly constructed; material very well-organised.

15 − 17:   Well-organised; aims met with no significant errors or omissions.

12 − 14:   Coherent and competent organisation.

10 − 11:   Lack of clarity in written presentation or aims only partially met.

6 − 9:   Major flaws in arguments; aims of project not met.

0 − 5:   Arguments are missing/deficient. Disorganised or fragmentary.

Originality, interpretation and analysis   (20)

17 − 20:   Significant originality in the interpretation and/or analysis;  project aims challenging.

14 − 16:   Some originality; evidence of excellent analytical and problem- solving skills.

12 − 13:   Good attempt to interpret and analyse existing literature.

10 − 11:   Minor flaws in interpretation/analysis of existing literature.

5 − 9:   Poor interpretation/analysis or project aims too simple.

0 − 4: Little or no interpretation or analysis; project aims trivial.

Evidence of reading (10)

8 − 10:   Independent reading including research papers.

6 − 7:    Good use of outside reading.

4 − 5:    Some evidence of outside reading.

0 − 3:    Little or no evidence of outside reading.  

Bibliography and referencing   (10)

9 − 10:   Of publishable quality.

7 − 8:    Good referencing and bibliography.

5 − 6:     Either poor bibliography or poor referencing.

3 − 4:    Poor bibliography and little or no referencing.

0 − 2:    No bibliography and little or no referencing.

Style, spelling, punctuation and grammar (10)

9 − 10:   Incisive and fluent, no errors of spelling, punctuation or grammar.

7 − 8:    Very minor errors of spelling, punctuation or grammar.

4 − 6:    Some errors of spelling, punctuation or grammar.

0 − 3:    Many errors of spelling, punctuation or grammar.

Find your Mathematics course

• Mathematical Studies BSc
• Mathematics BSc
• Mathematics MSci
• Mathematics and Management BSc
• Mathematics and Music BA
• Mathematics and Physics BSc
• Mathematics and Physics MSci
• Mathematics with French BSc
• Mathematics with German BSc
• Mathematics with Italian BSc
• Mathematics with Management BSc
• Mathematics with Philosophy BSc
• Mathematics with Spanish BSc
• Mathematics with Statistics BSc
• Computer Science and Mathematics BSc
• Economics and Mathematics BSc
• Economics and Mathematics with a Year in Business BSc
• Finance and Mathematics BSc
• Finance and Mathematics with a Year in Business BSc
• Management with Mathematics BSc
• Modern Languages with Mathematics BA
• Mathematics for Applications MSc
• Mathematics of Cryptography and Communications MSc
• settings Undergraduate Postgraduate taught Postgraduate research Search Mathematics All departments View all undergraduate courses for 2018 View all undergraduate courses for 2019 View all postgraduate courses for 2018
• Mobile site view
• Desktop site view
• Media enquiries
• Modern Slavery Act
• IT Services
• Social media
• CampusAnywhere
• Terms and conditions

Comment on this page

Did you find the information you were looking for? Is there a broken link or content that needs updating? Let us know so we can improve the page.

Note: If you need further information or have a question that cannot be satisfied by this page, please call our switchboard on +44 (0)1784 434455.

This window will close when you submit your comment.

• Assessment Fairness and Marking
• Higher Education Student Handbook

This page explains how University College Birmingham ensures that all work undertaken and examinations sat by our students are considered fairly. It also gives details about how our grades are decided and applied to students' work and examinations.

University College Birmingham places great importance on ensuring that all students have an equal opportunity to do well. There is a number of practices in place to support this.

Academic Integrity and Misconduct

Throughout your programme of study UCB will provide opportunity for you to develop your academic skills. Helping you to study section of this handbook provides details of support available to students in developing academic practice. 

Cheating, collusion and plagiarism are types of Academic Misconduct.  These are some of the names used for ways in which a student may present as their own, work completed, or written by someone else. Academic Misconduct is taken very seriously by University College Birmingham.

University College Birmingham's Code of Practice on Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct details the process by which matters of Academic Misconduct are investigated and the penalties that may be applied. University College Birmingham's disciplinary procedures relating to assessment offences are shown in the General Student Regulations .

The Guild of Students are available to support students with queries regarding Academic Integrity and Misconduct.

Ensuring that the grades you are awarded are fair

Before assignments are given to students, they are subject to an internal moderation process which ensures they are at an appropriate level, allow students to achieve the learning outcomes and have appropriate grading criteria in place. All assessments are marked in line with these criteria and then grades are checked by a moderator to make sure they are consistent and fairly awarded. This moderating of grades is then also looked at by an external examiner to ensure appropriate grades are awarded. The Assessment and Moderation Cycle shows you the process and considerations lecturers follow when assessing your work. All marks are provisional and may go up or down until the Board of Examiners has been confirmed and published final marks.

Who sits on the Board of Examiners?

Module lecturers, tutors and Year Managers from each course team are the staff who know each student and their work best. They all attend the exam boards at which their students’ work is considered. The relevant Head of Department will also attend the board which is Chaired by the Executive Dean of the School or their nominee.

The Examinations Unit records all decisions made ready to publish. UCB Registry also attend every Board of Examiners. Their role is to ensure that decisions are made in line with our Assessment Regulations and that practices are consistent across all exam boards.

At the Board of Examiners meeting for students due to be awarded, one or more External Examiner will usually participate. External Examiners are experienced professionals, often senior teaching figures from other HE institutions or occasionally senior figures from industry. They are chosen for their expert knowledge of your course’s area of study. Their role is to monitor the quality of teaching and on your course and ensure that it is compatible with national standards.  Further information on the role of External Examiners and an External Examiner Guide for Students are available.

HE Generic Grading Criteria/Feedback Sheets

University College Birmingham uses a standard system relating to feedback and grading of assessed work on Higher Education (HE) courses.

The system is designed to:

Clarify and reinforce to students and lecturers the features and expectations of work at a given level on Higher Education courses;

Clarify the features and expectations of work characteristic to a range of marks;

Ensure consistency and transparency in terms of the approach to grading of HE work across the University’s course portfolio;

Foster and promote constructive feedback to students.

The criteria show the generally sought after features of student work at each level of study on HE courses within a range of marks.

The criteria have been benchmarked against national standards.

Please find the HE Generic Grading Criteria below:

Level 4 Level 5   Level 6   Level 7

The criteria under each category have been written to reflect the change of emphasis that occurs as you progress between levels of study. For certain modules and assessment tasks, specially devised feedback sheets are used. Your lecturer will advise you on the basis by which you are being assessed. Specialist criteria may apply to certain modules due to their specific technical nature.

Grading of Work

Undergraduates - Monitoring Your Progress and Classifications  

For Undergraduate students, shortly after you receive assessment feedback from your module lecturer, provisional marks are relayed to the Examinations Unit and updated in the My Results page on the Student Dashboard or U@UCB app. This information will enable you to track your progress on all assessments you have submitted. 

Grading Undergraduate Work

All student work is awarded a percentage mark. For undergraduate courses, the pass mark is 40%. Keeping track of the marks you receive will help you to gauge your performance.  

Degree classifications, the final grade for your degree overall are as follows: 

• First Class Honour - (1 st )
• Second Class Honours (Upper Division) (2.1)
• Second Class Honours (Lower Division) (2.2)
• Third Class Honours  (3 rd ) and

You may be more familiar with the shortened name shown in brackets above.

For BA and BSc degrees your final classification is calculated using a combination of the weighted average of your marks at level 5 and level 6, the number of credits achieved and the number of credits achieved at a particular level. The exact combination of these may vary depending on which year you started your degree. Full details can be found in the Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.3.1. This document explains whether your final award is classified and if it is, how the final classification is calculated. 

In very general terms

• 70% and above equates to 1st class
• 60-69% equates to a 2:1
• 50-59% equates to a 2:2
• 40-49% equates to a 3rd class
• 39% and below is a fail

Foundation Degrees

A foundation degree is unclassified, pass only. However, it may be useful to think in terms of the level you are working at in the following way. Particularly if you intend to top-up to a Bachelor's degree in the future.

In general terms for classified Foundation Degrees

Grade Calculator

You can also use the Grade Calculator to help you manage your performance by working out your weighted average for a level of study or to calculate the marks need to pass a module based on the weighting of the individual assessments. This is not a tool for calculating your final classification, but can be used to monitor your performance and provide an indication of the level that you are working at. 

Benefits of the System

University College Birmingham is keen to develop assessment feedback mechanisms to guide you towards a positive learning experience. As such, awareness of the criteria should help you raise your grading profile. Consistent use of the generic grading criteria across your assessments should mean that the level of work that is expected of you should become clearer over time. You will soon become very familiar with the criteria.

You can also use the generic grading criteria to self-reflect on your attainment by reviewing the criteria for higher grades on the sheet against your own performance. Additionally, the generic grading criteria are designed to encourage lecturers to fully consider the attributes of your presented work. Attributes related to both academic and professional features are assessed.

As the grading criteria are written in a common format across each level of study, you should be able to see more clearly how expectations change as you move from one level to the next through your course. For all assessment, you will receive a % mark which will have been subject to internal procedures and remains a provisional mark until the conclusion of the External Examination Board.

‘Levels’ of Work

Students on Higher Education courses are assessed at various ‘levels’ during their course. It is now common practice to refer to ‘level of study’ rather than ‘year of study’. This is because students have various modes of attendance - for example, part-time courses take more years to complete than full-time courses. Some courses include a 48-week work placement and thus take longer to complete.

The various levels of study are shown below:

Level P (Progression): This is foundation year level, i.e. preparing students to enter HE courses at level 4.

Level 4 (Certificate Level): This is generally year one of full-time HE courses.

Level 5 (Foundation/Diploma Level): This is generally the second year of full-time HE courses (or the second/third years of courses which include a 48-week work placement).

Level 6 (Honours Level): This is the final stage of undergraduate degree work. Generally the third year of undergraduate degree courses (or the fourth year of courses that include a 48 week placement).

Level 7 (Masters Level): This is postgraduate level.

Note: all assignments that you receive should confirm the ‘level’ of work that applies.

Use of Customised Grading Criteria Specific to Individual Assignments and Assessed Seminars

In addition to the use of generic grading criteria, you may undertake assessments where the lecturers issue additional criteria specific to that assessment. Furthermore, some assessments, for example those of a very practical nature, may specify different criteria. However, what is required of you and the grading criteria applicable should ALWAYS be made clear on the assignment.

Your lecturer may direct you to additional formative support or on-site facilities/services which you may find helpful.

Teamwork and its assessment

Should your assignment require you to work as part of a team, you will receive an individual grade based upon your performance, as well as personalised feedback. The module leader will explain how your individual grade and feedback will be determined.

Importance of Word Counts and Presentation Timings

Assignment word counts and presentation timings should always be observed. Ignoring a word count increases significantly the risk of your work losing marks because it lacked structure, flow, focus and clarity. Timings must be observed for assessed presentations for the same reasons.

Please note that for written assignments, the following are included  in the word count:

• Main headings and sub-headings
• In-text citations

The following are  not  part of the word count:

• Title page, Contents page, Reference List and Appendices.
• Content in models, graphs, data tables and other exhibited figures or images, including their titles.

Examination Feedback

Students can access the examiner’s comments from their examination scripts by contacting [email protected]  for a Request to Access Examiners' Comments form.

Postgraduates - Monitoring your progress

For postgraduate students shortly after you receive assessment feedback from your module lecturer, provisional marks are relayed to the Examinations Unit and updated in the My Results page on the Student Dashboard or U@UCB app. This information will enable you to track your progress on all assessments you have submitted.  Keeping track of the marks you receive will help you to gauge your performance.

Grading postgraduate work and final awards

Grading on these courses is based on a percentage grading system. The mark for a pass at Masters Level is 50%.  

Postgraduate awards are made at Pass, Merit or Distinction.  This is calculated based on a combination of the weighted average of the taught programme and the number of credits achieved. Full details of the way that this is calculated can be found in 1.3.2 a and b of the Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award .

In general terms for postgraduate degrees

• 70%-100% equates to Distinction
• 60%-69% equates to Merit
• 50%-59% equates to Pass
• 49% and below is a fail

Getting your results

Following meetings of the Boards of Examiners, final results of a student’s assessments will be published on  the Student Dashboard . This will show, for each module:

• The marks gained for each component of the module,
• The total module mark and
• The number of credits achieved

The decision of the Board of Examiners will also be published at the end of each level of study in the same place (at the end of each semester for PT Foundation Degree students). The decision indicates whether a student:

• Can progress to the next stage of the course,
• Is required to resit assessment,
• Has been offered a first attempt at assessment due to extenuating circumstances,
• Is required to repeat study or
• Whether a student has achieved an award.

Assessment results are posted on UCB Portal at 12pm on the dates of publication.

Access the Portal

By clicking on the Decision bar, students can access full details of what to do next.

It is each student’s responsibility to check their own results as soon as possible after publication. Details of publications dates can be found on Canvas. Contact the  Examinations Unit  with any queries.

Canvas Contact the Examination Unit

Understanding Credits

The number of credits awarded at each stage of study is very important. Each year of study could generate a maximum of 120 credits. Normally, any student failing a module will be required to repeat or re-sit assessment in order to gain the requisite number of credits before progressing. However, there are some circumstances in which progression may be permitted with only 100, or 110 credits. 

For undergraduate programmes and the taught programme for postgraduates, students who have achieved fewer than 60 credits within the level of study, will usually be asked to repeat all failed modules and will not usually be offered a further opportunity to resubmit. There may be exceptions to this on programmes subject to PSRB requirements.

Credit is awarded when the learning outcomes for a module are met. This is usually indicated by achieving a pass mark for the module overall (40% at undergraduate level, 50% at postgraduate level). In some cases it may be possible to achieve a pass mark where at least one component of the module is not passed.  In this situation credit may not be awarded. Full details can be found in UCB's Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.2.1.

Credit and Undergraduate Awards

For Foundation Degree students an award can be made with 100 credits achieved at Level 4 and 100 credits achieved at Level 5 (this may differ for courses with Must Pass modules). Students should be aware that they must attempt all modules at each level. However, students must achieve a minimum of 200 credits on the Foundation Degree including 100 credits at Level 5 to be considered for admission to the BA or BSc top up year. 

For BA or BSc students a minimum of 320 credits must be achieved across the 3 years of the course or 440 credits across 4 years for courses with placement to be considered for an Honours degree. In addition, at least 100 credits must be passed in the final year for a classification to be awarded. 

Therefore, it is possible that a BA/BSc student could complete the degree course and pass the dissertation, but only achieve 300 credits and not be awarded an honours degree or classification. By taking resits or repeating study (if required) you give yourself the best opportunity to achieve.

Any undergraduate student with questions about the number of credits they have achieved can contact the Examinations Unit to discuss their situation.

Full details of the credits required to achieve an award can be found in UCB’s Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.3 .

Contact The Examination Unit

Honours Degree Classifications

The following classifications are used to show the overall performance of a student on a BA or BSc course:

• 1st  - First Class Honours
• 2.1  - Upper Second Class Honours
• 2.2  - Lower Second Class Honours
• 3rd  - Third Class Honours
• Pass  - Pass without Honours (unclassified degree)

Foundation Degrees, Foundation Diplomas and Graduate Certificates/Diplomas are not classified and are awarded as a Pass.

How your overall degree classification is calculated

For BA and BSc degrees your final classification is calculated using a combination of the weighted average of your marks at level 5 and level 6, the number of credits achieved and the number of credits achieved at a particular level.  The exact combination of these may vary depending on which year you started your degree. Full details can be found in the Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.3.1.  and in the University’s classification schemes for students enrolling before 2020 and students enrolling in 2020 and onwards. This document explains whether your final award is classified and if it is, how the final classification is calculated. 

Classified Foundation Degrees

For students starting the first year of a Foundation Degree in 2020/2021 your final Foundation degree will be awarded as a pass, merit or distinction.  The final classification will be calculated based on a weighted average of marks. Full details can be found in the Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.3.1.  This document explains whether your final award is classified and if it is, how the final classification is calculated.

Credit and Postgraduate Awards

In order to Progress to Dissertation, a postgraduate student must have achieved a mark of 40% or more in all taught modules and have gained at least 80 credits at Level 7 in modules taken as part of the taught component of the course. 

Full details of the credits required to achieve an award and the criteria for the awards at Merit and Distinction can be found in UCB’s Academic Regulations Part 2: Assessment, Progression and Award 1.3 .

Any Postgraduate student with questions about the number of credits they have achieved can contact the Examinations Unit to discuss their situation.

Further help

Further information on how degree classifications are calculated is available by making an appointment with your Examinations Officer to discuss your grade profile by emailing [email protected] .

For queries about any information in the section, please contact the  [email protected]  or the  [email protected]  or visit us in Room 629 in the Summer Row Campus.

Your student record, or transcript

On successful completion of a course, all students are awarded a certificate by the relevant awarding body (eg. UCB or University of Birmingham). This is usually provided at or shortly after Graduation. You will also be provided with a formal record of the modules studied and your marks in the form of an Academic Transcript. This will show details of the awarded studied, qualification awarded and classification, where applicable.  Academic Transcripts also detail the total mark achieved for each module studied and the number of credits achieved. Your Personal Tutor can provide, on request, a reference which includes information about placements, prizes or other achievements.

The Examinations Unit normally produces one free transcript for each student at the end their level of study/course. For students completing an programme of study a digital copy  of your final Academic Transcript will be published through the University College Birmingham's  secure document site  Verify , while a hard copy will be posted to the student’s permanent home address. Students who do not receive the hard copy of the academic transcript within 16 weeks of the publication of results can contact the  Examinations Unit  to request a free replacement transcript. After this 16-week period, if we have not heard from you, the assumption will be made that your transcript has been safely delivered to your address. Students enquiring for transcripts  after  this 16-week period will have to either place their order through  Verify  for students who graduated in either 2019 or 2020 or contact the  Registry  for additional copies of lost/new transcripts. If a student wants a replacement transcript for whatever reason, they must request this by writing to the Registry, completing the  Transcript Request Form  and making payment of £25. through the  Online Payments  page of the University College Birmingham website.

If a student requires a letter or transcript to confirm academic progress within the academic year and before final results have been published, the student can contact the Examinations Unit to request an interim transcript. Registry may also be able to provide a letter confirming a student’s current status if required. The Academic Registry and the Examinations Unit are based on the Third Floor of The Link building.

Verify University College Birmingham Online Payments Portal Transcript Request Form

Discover more

Assessment Graduate Attributes

The University is committed to providing our students with a rich and diverse educational experience that will support and shape both their personal and profess…

Assessments If Things Go Wrong

This page tells you what can happen if you fail a module and also how to apply for Extenuating Circumstances or make an appeal.

Helping you to study

From our team of Subject Librarians are qualified Library and Information professionals to our CASE centre open to all students there is a number ways we can help with yo…

IT at University College Birmingham

The IT support Unit, DICE, Web Developers and AV teams are all located in the ground floor of Camden House.

Learning Opportunities

Within your course, there are different ways in which content is delivered and different ways that you can explore ideas or concepts in depth in your own time through i…

Essay Writing

Some assignments, and most examination answers, will be required to be presented in the form of an essay. Here you can find all information on planning, paragraphing and conclud…

Arising where work submitted by a student is not their own, but has been taken from another source.

Work Placements

Placements are administered by a team of Employability Tutors based within hired@UCB on the Ground Floor of the Moss House Campus.

Changing your course

Every year, some students decide that they wish to change their programme of study, and move either to another programme within University College Birmingham.

Come and visit us on one of our open days, where you can find out more about our courses, our facilities and speak to current students and staff.

There are many ways you can contact University College Birmingham, from phone and email to social media.

• Undergraduate study
• Find a course
• Open days and visits
• New undergraduates
• Postgraduate study
• Find a programme
• Visits and open days
• New postgraduates
• International students
• Accommodation
• Schools & faculties
• Business & partnerships
• Current students
• Current staff

Academic Quality and Policy Office

• Academic Integrity
• Academic Student Support
• 2: Changes for 2023/24
• 3: Academic integrity
• 4: Academic awards and programme structures
• 5: Recognition of prior learning
• 6: Academic student support
• 7: Suspension of study
• 8: Supplementary year
• 9: Forms of assessment
• 10: Conduct of assessment
• 11: Reasonable adjustment to assessment because of disability or other reason
• 12. Submission and considering the impact of student circumstances
• 13: Feedback to students
• 14: Marking practices: benchmarking and calibration
• 15: Marking criteria and scales
• 16: Moderation and treatment of marks
• 17: Anonymity
• 18: Penalties
• 19: Pass marks
• 20: Boards of examiners
• 21: Appeals against decisions of boards of examiners
• 23: Treatment and publication of results
• 24: Admission and study (UG)
• 25: Programme structure and design (UG)
• 26: Study abroad (UG)
• 27: Industrial placements (UG)
• 28: Intercalation (UG)
• 29: Processing and recording marks (UG)
• 30: Student progression and completion (UG modular)
• 31: Student progression and completion (UG non-modular)
• 32: Awards and classification (UG modular)
• 33: Awards and classification (UG non-modular)
• 34: Admission and study (PGT)
• 35: Programme structure and design (PGT)
• 36: Extension of study (PGT)
• 37: Processing and recording marks (PGT)
• 38: Student progression and completion (PGT)
• 39: Awards and classification (PGT)
• Temporary amendments for 2019/20
• Temporary amendments for 2020/21
• Temporary amendments for 2021/22 and after
• Temporary amendments for 2022/23
• Annexes to the Regulations and Code of Practice for Taught Programmes
• Assessment and Feedback Strategy
• Institutional Principles for Assessment and Feedback
• Feedback to Students
• External Examiners
• Committees and Groups
• Degree Outcomes Statement
• Educational Partnerships
• Postgraduate Education
• Programme and Unit Development and Approval
• Quality Framework
• Student Surveys
• Undergraduate Education
• Unit Evaluation

Related links

• Education and Student Success
• Bristol Institute For Learning and Teaching
• QAA Quality Code

Education and Student Success intranet

University home > Academic Quality and Policy Office > Assessment and Feedback > Regulations and Code of Practice for Taught Programmes > 38: Student progression and completion (PGT)

38. Student Progression and Completion (taught postgraduate)

University of Bristol Beacon House Queens Road Bristol, BS8 1QU, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 928 9000 Contact us

Information for

• New students

Connect with us

Study at bristol.

• Students' Union
• Sport, exercise and health
• Find a researcher
• Faculty research
• Impact of our research
• Research quality and assessment
• Engaging with the public

About the University

• Maps and travel
• Tours and visits
• The University on film
• Explore the city of Bristol
• Board of Trustees

Support the University

• Alumni and friends
• Working at Bristol
• Job listings

A–Z of the University

• Terms and conditions
• Accessibility statements
• Privacy and cookie policy
• Modern Slavery statement
• © 2024 University of Bristol

• Schools & departments

Information on examination & progression to dissertation.

Assesment and progression to dissertation

The MSc programme structure comprises a taught component during semesters 1 and 2 with dedicated time for a research dissertation over the summer of the 12 month programme.

You will be assessed on the taught component of the programme by a combination of coursework and exams.  The exact weighting between coursework and exam is listed on the course DRPS entry. 

The University of Edinburgh uses a Common Marking Scheme (CMS) for taught student assessment.  Students are marked against this marking scale.  You are not ranked against your peers.  The Common Marking Scheme link below describes in more detail the level of performance corresponding to the different numeric marks and alphabetic grades in an Informatics context.

Common Marking Scheme

Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study

The correspondence between numerical marks, grades and their interpretation in terms of the MSc is given below. 

  In order to pass at MSc level, and continue on to the MSc dissertation in the summer you must meet both of the following criteria:

• Achieve an average mark of at least 50% over the taught component of the programme , excluding Pass/Fail courses.
• Pass at least 80 out of your 120 credit points with a mark of at least 50%. All courses (including Pass/Fail courses) count towards this credit total.

If you do not meet these requirements you will not be permitted to progress to complete your dissertation and you may be eligible for a PG Diploma or PG Certificate award.

Full details of assessment applicable to all Informatics students is available in the following section of the student handbook:

Assessment: Coursework, exams & feedback

All progression decisions are made by the Boards of Examiners once all of your course marks for the taught component are available.  The Board of Examiners considers students' marks and credits achieved across all courses, in the context of any relevant valid Special Circumstances.  All marks are provisional until they are ratified by the Board of Examiners.

Special Circumstances

Attendance in Edinburgh

Students are expected to stay in Edinburgh for the duration of their degree programme, including examination diets.  It's important to confirm your examination dates before arranging any absences from Edinburgh.  You are also expected to stay in Edinburgh during the writing of the MSc dissertation until the submission deadline. If you are on a Student/Tier 4 visa and leave the country for an extended period of time, the School is obligated to contact the Student Immigration Service who will notify UK Visa and Immigration (UKVI).  The School also reserves the right to require you to return to Edinburgh to complete your studies, and to withhold dissertation supervision if you refuse to do so.

Student Visa attendance and monitoring

Final Awards

Your dissertation mark and final award will be considered by the Board of Examiners held in October. 

Your final award will be classified based on the following criteria:

• Award of MSc with Distinction: To achieve a distinction, you must be awarded at least 70% on the University’s Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme for the dissertation and must achieve an average of at least 70% in the taught component.
• Award of MSc with Merit: To achieve a merit, you must be awarded at least 60% on the University’s Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme for the dissertation and must achieve an average of at least 60% in the taught component .
• Award of MSc: To achieve a pass you must be awarded at least 50% on the University’s Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme for the dissertation and must achieve an average of at least 50% in the taught component .
• Award of PG Diploma: To achieve a PG diploma pass you must pass at least 80 credits with a mark of at least 40% and attain an average of at least 40% for the taught component.
• Award of PG Certificate: To achieve a PG certificate pass you must pass at least 40 credits with a mark of at least 40% and attain an average of at least 40% for 60 credits of study with the highest marks .

Borderlines

The Board of Examiners considers borderline cases as described in the Taught Assessment Regulations . Borderline marks are defined as marks from two percentage points below the class or grade boundary up to the bo undary itself, e.g. 58.00% to 59.99% for a merit classification.

Borderline decisions may take into account the following factors:

• cases in which a student has performed better in courses at a higher level
• cases where the amount of credited assessed work to be used for classification or award decisions is less than the norm (e.g., where credits have been awarded for progression purposes only in recognition of special circumstances)
• individual student profiles of performance.

• View all courses
• Taught postgraduate study
• Postgraduate taught degree courses
• Postgraduate taught tuition fees
• Pre-masters for international students
• Funding your postgraduate taught studies
• How to apply for a postgraduate taught degree
• Pre-sessional English courses
• PhDs and research degrees
• Create your own research project
• Find a PhD project
• Funding your research degree
• How to apply for a PhD or research degree
• How to make a PhD enquiry
• Support while studying your PhD or research degree
• Exchanges and studying abroad
• Undergraduate study
• Undergraduate degree courses
• Foundation year programmes
• Undergraduate tuition fees
• Customise your degree
• Funding undergraduate studies
• How to apply
• Tuition fees and funding
• Short courses
• Lunchtime evening and weekend courses
• Summer schools
• Get a prospectus
• Student life
• Accommodation
• Choose your halls of residence
• Apply for accommodation
• Guaranteed accommodation
• Your accommodation options
• Accommodation for those with additional requirements
• International and pre-sessional students
• Postgraduate accommodation
• Couples and students with children
• Renting privately
• Our accommodation areas
• Privacy notice
• Terms and conditions
• Fees and contracts
• Southampton
• Sports and gyms
• Sports facilities
• Sports clubs
• Watersports centres
• Our campuses
• Avenue Campus
• Boldrewood Innovation Campus
• City Centre Campus
• Highfield Campus
• University Hospital Southampton
• Waterfront Campus
• Winchester Campus
• Join our student community
• What's on
• Clubs and societies
• Sports teams
• SUSU places
• Representing you
• SUSU support and advice
• Support and money
• Living costs
• Academic and mental health support
• Support for disabled students
• Part-time work
• Health services
• Research projects
• Research areas
• Research facilities
• Collaborate with us
• Institutes, centres and groups
• Support for researchers
• Faculties, schools and departments
• Research jobs
• Find people and expertise
• Why work with us?
• Collaboration
• Consultancy
• Commercialisation
• Use our facilities
• Connect with our students
• How we operate
• Make a business enquiry
• International students
• International Office
• Partnerships and initiatives
• Visiting delegations
• Visiting fellowships

Progression, Determination and Classification of Results: Undergraduate and Integrated Masters Programmes 2023-24

Note: Students who first enrolled on their current degree programme in 2011-12 or previously should refer to the regulations displayed in the archived version of the Calendar for the year in which they first enrolled on their degree programme.

1. Introduction

1.1 The following regulations apply to all Undergraduate and Integrated Masters taught programmes at levels 6 and 7 (see Credit Accumulation and Transfer (CAT) Scheme ), except in so far as a variation or an exemption for particular programmes has been allowed under 1.3 and 1.4 below. These Regulations should be read in conjunction with the Regulations and Definitions Applying to Progression for all Credit-Bearing Programmes . Defined terms are capitalised in the regulations.

1.2 Where there are exceptional circumstances resulting in a student’s performance being worthy of special consideration, as defined in the Regulations Governing Special Considerations (including Deadline Extension Requests) for all Taught Programmes and Taught Assessed Components of Research Degrees , a Board of Examiners, on the recommendation of a Special Considerations Board, has the authority to disregard aspects of these regulations and seek alternative evidence, or offer alternative methods or times for re-assessment, to show that the required learning outcomes have been achieved. Detailed guidance for Boards of Examiners is given in the Quality Handbook .

1.3 Schools may, with good cause, operate variations on the following Progression scheme. Normally such variations occur in order to meet the stipulations of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs), or where there are funding or fitness to practise conditions or legislative requirements in another country for a programme delivered under the University's Collaborative Provision Policy. Where Schools operate variations on the scheme this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations. In order to maintain oversight, Academic Quality and Standards Subcommittee (AQSS), will review all variations on an annual basis for compliance with the criteria.

1.4 With the approval of AQSS Schools may operate an exemption from the following Progression scheme. Normally this will be for one year in order to bring the programme into line with the regulations. Where Schools operate an approved exemption this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations.

2. Definitions specific to Undergraduate and Integrated Masters Programmes

2.1 The University standard Module Pass Mark for undergraduate students taking Modules at all levels is 40. Where professional standards, including but not limited to PSRB requirements, require a Module Pass Mark that differs from the University standard this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations.

2.2 The University standard Average Mark for a Part for undergraduate students on each Part of a programme is 40. Where professional standards, including but not limited to PSRB requirements, require an Average Mark for a Part that differs from the University standard this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations.

2.3 The University standard Qualifying Mark for undergraduate students taking Modules at all levels is 25 except for modules where credit only is being imported from an exchange or outgoing study abroad for which the Qualifying Mark is zero. Where professional standards, including but not limited to PSRB requirements, require a Qualifying Mark that differs from the University standard this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations.

3. Criteria for Progression

3.1 In order to progress to the next Part of a programme or to an award, as appropriate, all Modules and each Part must be Passed at the specified Pass Mark except as allowed in paragraph 3.4 below. Each Part must be successfully completed before the next Part is commenced.

3.2 Some Parts of some programmes may in addition require a student to achieve an Average Mark for the Part which is greater than the University standard Average Mark for a Part. Details will be given in the relevant programme regulations and will be subject to annual review by AQSS. Regulations relating to Referral and Repeat to achieve an Average Mark for the Part which is greater than the Module Pass Mark are given in Section 6.

3.3 A student who wishes to transfer to a programme with Year in Employment in the title must progress from the relevant Part at the first attempt in order to proceed onto the Year in Employment module. A student must also meet any additional progression criteria for the substantive programme at the first attempt before proceeding onto the Year in Employment module as specified in paragraph 3.2.

3.4 Pass by Compensation

A student Passing all Core Modules and achieving or exceeding the University standard Average Mark for the Part, but failing to achieve the required Pass Mark in non-Core Modules totalling at most 15 ECTS (30 CATS), may be awarded credit and a Pass by Compensation in those failed modules provided no Module Mark is less than the Qualifying Mark and (subject to meeting any additional requirements under paragraph 3.2) will progress to the next Part of the programme or to an award. In deciding whether a student may progress, these criteria are applied first and, if a Pass is so achieved, no Referral right is retained (except as specified in paragraph 6.1).

3.5 A student who does not Pass has a right to Refer if eligible according to the Referral criteria laid out in paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 and section 6 below. A student not eligible to Refer has a right to Repeat as laid out in sections 5 and 6 below.

3.6 Any Module failed by a student on an exchange or undertaking outgoing study abroad will count towards the credit limits for the volume of Compensatable Fails in 3.4 above or 4.1 below.

4. Referral

4.1 For students who fail to progress under paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 on a programme where all Modules in a Part have been designated Core in order to meet the stipulations of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies, Referral is allowed in Failed modules in that Part totalling at most 30 ECTS (60 CATS) if permitted by the programme regulations.

4.2 A student who fails to progress under paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4, and to whom 4.1 does not apply, may Refer in Failed Modules totalling at most 15 ECTS (30 CATS).

• 4.2.1 A student Failing in Modules to a maximum of 30 ECTS (60 CATS) who has achieved the University Average Mark for the Part may be awarded credit and a Pass by Compensation in eligible Modules up to a maximum of 15 ECTS (30 CATS). A student may then Refer in up to 15 ECTS (30 CATS) of further modules, with the constraints that all Core Modules and all Modules in which the mark obtained is less than the Qualifying Mark must be Referred and that Referrals may be taken only in the minimum number of credits needed to achieve a Pass in the Part, as long as doing so successfully would enable the student to Pass the Part. A student who cannot obtain a Pass through the permitted number of Referrals is required to Repeat the Part.
• 4.2.2 If a Failed Module has a higher credit value than the student requires for Progression, the student may nonetheless be Referred in that Module.
• 4.2.3 A student is not permitted to Refer in a Module that has already been Passed in order to improve the mark, except where programme regulations require the student to achieve an Average Mark higher than the University standard required Average Mark for a Part - see paragraph 6.1 below.

4.3 The actual marks achieved at Referral are inserted into the previous marks profile and paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 are applied again to determine Progression. However, the Referral marks will be Capped at the Capped Mark for all calculations related to degree classification.

4.4 A student failing to progress after Referral may Repeat the appropriate Part of the programme as laid out in section 5 below.

4.5 A student who fails the assessment for the Year in Employment module may Refer in the Year in Employment module assessment. This must be at the next available opportunity.

5.1 A student who has not progressed to the next Part of the programme at the first attempt and who has either also not progressed after Referral (where permitted) or who does not qualify to take Referral assessments under section 4 above may Repeat the appropriate Part of the programme.

5.2 Section 3 of the Regulations and Definitions Applying to Progression for all Credit-Bearing Programmes should be consulted regarding the right to Repeat for students sponsored by the University to enter the UK under the points-based visa system.

5.3 Internal Repeat : A student choosing an Internal Repeat will be required to Repeat all Modules, including those Passed at the first attempt. A student choosing an Internal Repeat is not permitted to change to an External Repeat part way through the year. A student is permitted to select new Option Modules in place of the Option Modules taken at the first attempt. However a student will have no right to Refer in any Modules taken during the Repeat, including Option Modules taken for the first time. The marks achieved at Internal Repeat will be inserted into the marks profile and paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 applied again to determine Progression. Marks for Modules in which the Module Pass Mark was not obtained at the first attempt, and for any new Option Modules substituted for such modules, will be Capped at the Capped Mark for all calculations related to determination of a final degree classification (see Section 8 below). For all other Modules the mark obtained at Repeat will be carried forward.

5.4 External Repeat : A student choosing an External Repeat will be required to Repeat those Modules in which the Module Pass Mark was not obtained at the first attempt or at Referral. The most recent marks for Modules not Repeated will be retained for determining Progression. The marks achieved at External Repeat will be inserted into the most recent marks profile and paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 applied again to determine Progression. The marks obtained during External Repeat and those arising from Referral will be Capped at the Capped Mark for all calculations related to determination of a final degree classification (see section 9 below).

5.5 The Progression criteria for a Repeating student are the same as for the first attempt excluding the right of Referral.

5.6 Any Part may be Repeated only once. The programme of a candidate failing after Repeat shall be terminated.

5.7 A student may not Repeat the Year in Employment module.

6. Referrals and Repeats for Integrated Masters Programmes and other Programme Parts with a higher required average

6.1 Referral

Where programme regulations require a student to achieve an Average Mark for the Part which is higher than the University standard required Average Mark for a Part, a student failing to achieve this higher Average Mark for the Part may Refer in Modules in which the mark originally achieved was less than the required Average Mark for the Part, to a maximum credit value of 15 ECTS (30 CATS). In this case:

• 6.1.1 Students may choose the Modules in which they refer, with the constraint that Modules in which the mark achieved is a Non-Compensatable fail must be taken.
• 6.1.2 The actual marks obtained at Referral will be inserted into the marks profile to determine whether the required Average Mark has been obtained.
• 6.1.3 For the purpose of the classification algorithm described in paragraph 9.6 below, marks for Modules originally Failed will be Capped at the Capped Mark; for Modules Passed but Referred to raise the Average Mark for the Part, the original Module mark will be carried forward.
• 6.1.4 If the Referral is successful, the Average Mark for the Part carried forward for the Part will be the required Average Mark for the Part.
• 6.1.5 If the student subsequently elects to transfer to a programme not requiring the higher Average Mark for the Part, that part of the Referral not needed to meet the requirements of the new programme shall be disregarded and the Average Mark for the Part recalculated on that basis.
• 6.1.6 If the student does not obtain the required Average Mark for the Part on Referral, a Repeat will be permitted.

A student Repeating solely in order to achieve an Average Mark for a Part higher than the University standard required Average Mark for a Part may choose to Repeat Internally or Externally. In this case:

• 6.2.1 An Internal Repeat will consist of all Modules, including those Passed at the first sitting. A student is permitted to select new Option Modules in place of the Option Modules taken at the first attempt. A student choosing an Internal Repeat is not permitted to change to an External Repeat part way through the year. However a student will have no right to Refer in such Modules. The marks achieved at Internal Repeat will be inserted into the marks profile and paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 applied again to determine Progression. Marks for Modules in which the Module Pass Mark was not obtained at the first attempt and for any new Options substituted for such modules will be Capped at the Module Pass Mark for all calculations related to determination of a final degree classification (see section 9 below). For all other Modules the mark obtained at Repeat will be carried forward. The Average Mark carried forward for the Part to determine degree classification will be the required Average Mark.
• 6.2.2 An External Repeat will consist of all those Modules in which the Module Pass Mark was not obtained at the first attempt or at Referral. A student choosing an External Repeat is not permitted to change to an Internal Repeat part way through the year. In addition a student Repeating to achieve an Average Mark higher than the University standard required Average Mark for a Part may choose to Repeat any other module in which they achieved a mark lower than the required Average Mark at the first attempt or at Referral. The most recent marks for Modules not Repeated will be used for determining Progression. The marks achieved at External Repeat will be inserted into the most recent marks profile and paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 applied again to determine Progression. After determining progression, the marks for modules that were passed for the first time at external repeat or during referral will be capped at the Module Pass Mark and these capped marks will be used in the classification algorithm described in section 9 below. For all other Modules the mark obtained at the first attempt will be carried forward. The Average Mark carried forward for the Part to determine degree classification will be the required Average Mark.
• 6.2.3 If a student Repeats wholly or in part in order to achieve an Average Mark which is above the University standard required Average Mark for a Part, but subsequently transfers to a programme not requiring the higher Average Mark, that part of the Repeat not needed to meet the requirements of the new programme shall be disregarded and the Average Mark recalculated on that basis.

7.1 A student must complete and pass a minimum of 30 ECTS (60 CATS) to qualify for their chosen Minor. Of those, no more than 7.5ECTS (15 CATS) may be at level 4.

7.2 In order to qualify for the Minor, a student must pass all Modules associated with the Minor at the standard Module Pass Mark. A student who is awarded a pass by Compensation in a failed Minor module will not qualify for the Minor. Minor modules passed at Referral or Repeat will count towards the Minor.

7.3 A student who decides that they do not wish to complete the Minor may do so at any stage of their programme.

7.4 Where a student's substantive Programme of Study (their main discipline) includes a dissertation as part of their final year, the student will be expected to pursue a topic within their main discipline.

7.5 A student who accumulates the credits necessary to qualify for a Minor will have 'with a Minor in [subject]' appended to their degree award title and diploma supplement.

8.1 A student successfully completing Part I of a programme according to the criteria in section 3 above, but for any reason not proceeding to complete Part II, may be awarded the Certificate of Higher Education.

8.2 A student successfully completing Part II of a programme according to the criteria in section 3 above, but for any reason not proceeding to complete Part III, may be awarded the Diploma of Higher Education.

8.3 If permitted by programme regulations, a student on an Integrated Masters programme successfully completing Part III of the programme according to the criteria in section 3 above, but for any reason not proceeding to complete Part IV, may be awarded a Bachelors Degree. The title of which will be detailed in the Programme Specification.

8.4 If permitted by programme regulations, an Ordinary Degree may be available to a student with sufficient credit at the relevant level who has not met the requirements to graduate on an Honours Degree programme.

9. Classified Awards

9.1 Mark Scheme

The degree classification shall be based on the 100-point Mark Scheme for the final degree average, ie:

These boundaries refer to the Final Average Mark rounded to the nearest integer. In order to meet the stipulations of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies, the programme regulations may specify a required Final Average Mark greater than the standard University Average Mark to define the lower boundary for a Pass. Where this applies this will be stated in the relevant programme regulations and will be subject to annual review by AQSS.

9.2 Weighting of Parts

Part I work shall be excluded from the final degree classification. A weighting of 0:1:2 shall be used to obtain the Final Average Mark for the three Parts of an Honours degree programme, and a weighting of 0:1:2:2 for the four Parts of an integrated Masters programme. This is in addition to weighting by credit points (for example, where Parts III and IV do not contain the same number of credit points).

9.3 For programmes involving a period of outgoing study abroad or an exchange, unless the programme has an approved translation of marks scheme, a student's final results will be calculated solely on marks obtained in Modules studied at the University.

9.4 For a student registered on an Honours degree programme at the University and spending one semester abroad for which there is no approved translation of marks scheme, the degree classification will be obtained as follows:

• 9.4.1 For Parts II, III and IV, the Average Mark for a Part will be calculated as the credit weighted average of the marks on modules undertaken at the University
• 9.4.2 The Final Average Mark and resulting degree classification will then be calculated from the Part II, III and IV averages as per 9.2 above.

9.5 For a student registered on an undergraduate programme and spending an entire year abroad for which there is no approved translation of marks scheme, the degree classification will be obtained as follows:

• 9.5.1 The Final Average Mark will be calculated from the Averages of the Parts undertaken at the University with the weighting of the relevant Parts as given in 9.2 above.

9.6 Classification Algorithm

The class awarded shall be that within which the Final Average Mark rounded to the nearest integer falls. The next higher class will be awarded if the unrounded Final Average Mark is within 2 marks of the higher class and at least 50% of the credit points, weighted by Part, are derived from Module Marks in the higher class or above.

9.7 The assessment for the Year in Employment module will not contribute to the final degree classification. However, in order to graduate on a programme with Year in Employment in the title, a student must pass the assessment.

Introduced September 2012. Reviewed in June 2019; no changes made. Reviewed October 2019- changes made to section 7. Minors. Reviewed December 2021 – changes made to paragraph 4.2.1. Reviewed June 2023 – Updated to reflect changes to education governance.

• Course modules
• Acoustical engineering
• Biomedical and medical engineering
• Civil engineering
• Every day I’m completely immersed in an environment that’s creative in all aspects
• Everything I learn feels so relevant, even If it’s a subject rooted in the past
• Maritime engineering
• Photonics and optoelectronics
• Social statistics and demography
• A missing link between continental shelves and the deep sea: Have we underestimated the importance of land-detached canyons?
• A seismic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• A study of rolling contact fatigue in electric vehicles (EVs)
• Acoustic monitoring of forest exploitation to establish community perspectives of sustainable hunting
• Acoustic sensing and characterisation of soil organic matter
• Advancing intersectional geographies of diaspora-led development in times of multiple crises
• Aero engine fan wake turbulence – Simulation and wind tunnel experiments
• Against Climate Change (DACC): improving the estimates of forest fire smoke emissions
• All-in-one Mars in-situ resource utilisation (ISRU) system and life-supporting using non-thermal plasma
• An electromagnetic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• An investigation of the relationship between health, home and law in the context of poor and precarious housing, and complex and advanced illness
• Antibiotic resistance genes in chalk streams
• Being autistic in care: Understanding differences in care experiences including breakdowns in placements for autistic and non-autistic children
• Biogeochemical cycling in the critical coastal zone: Developing novel methods to make reliable measurements of geochemical fluxes in permeable sediments
• Bloom and bust: seasonal cycles of phytoplankton and carbon flux
• British Black Lives Matter: The emergence of a modern civil rights movement
• Building physics for low carbon comfort using artificial intelligence
• Building-resolved large-eddy simulations of wind and dispersion over a city scale urban area
• Business studies and management: accounting
• Business studies and management: banking and finance
• Business studies and management: decision analytics and risk
• Business studies and management: digital and data driven marketing
• Business studies and management: human resources (HR) management and organisational behaviour
• Business studies and management: strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship
• Carbon storage in reactive rock systems: determining the coupling of geo-chemo-mechanical processes in reactive transport
• Cascading hazards from the largest volcanic eruption in over a century: What happened when Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai erupted in January 2022?
• Characterisation of cast austenitic stainless steels using ultrasonic backscatter and artificial intelligence
• Climate Change effects on the developmental physiology of the small-spotted catshark
• Climate at the time of the Human settlement of the Eastern Pacific
• Collaborative privacy in data marketplaces
• Compatibility of climate and biodiversity targets under future land use change
• Cost of living in modern and fossil animals
• Creative clusters in rural, coastal and post-industrial towns
• Deep oceanic convection: the outsized role of small-scale processes
• Defect categories and their realisation in supersymmetric gauge theory
• Defining the Marine Fisheries-Energy-Environment Nexus: Learning from shocks to enhance natural resource resilience
• Design and fabrication of next generation optical fibres
• Developing a practical application of unmanned aerial vehicle technologies for conservation research and monitoring of endangered wildlife
• Development and evolution of animal biomineral skeletons
• Development of all-in-one in-situ resource utilisation system for crewed Mars exploration missions
• Ecological role of offshore artificial structures
• Effect of embankment and subgrade weathering on railway track performance
• Efficient ‘whole-life’ anchoring systems for offshore floating renewables
• Electrochemical sensing of the sea surface microlayer
• Engagement with nature among children from minority ethnic backgrounds
• Enhancing UAV manoeuvres and control using distributed sensor arrays
• Ensuring the Safety and Security of Autonomous Cyber-Physical Systems
• Environmental and genetic determinants of Brassica crop damage by the agricultural pest Diamondback moth
• Estimating marine mammal abundance and distribution from passive acoustic and biotelemetry data
• Evolution of symbiosis in a warmer world
• Examining evolutionary loss of calcification in coccolithophores
• Explainable AI (XAI) for health
• Explaining process, pattern and dynamics of marine predator hotspots in the Southern Ocean
• Exploring dynamics of natural capital in coastal barrier systems
• Exploring the mechanisms of microplastics incorporation and their influence on the functioning of coral holobionts
• Exploring the potential electrical activity of gut for healthcare and wellbeing
• Exploring the trans-local nature of cultural scene
• Facilitating forest restoration sustainability of tropical swidden agriculture
• Faulting, fluids and geohazards within subduction zone forearcs
• Faulting, magmatism and fluid flow during volcanic rifting in East Africa
• Fingerprinting environmental releases from nuclear facilities
• Flexible hybrid thermoelectric materials for wearable energy harvesting
• Floating hydrokinetic power converter
• Glacial sedimentology associated subglacial hydrology
• Green and sustainable Internet of Things
• How do antimicrobial peptides alter T cell cytokine production?
• How do calcifying marine organisms grow? Determining the role of non-classical precipitation processes in biogenic marine calcite formation
• How do neutrophils alter T cell metabolism?
• How well can we predict future changes in biodiversity using machine learning?
• Hydrant dynamics for acoustic leak detection in water pipes
• If ‘Black Lives Matter’, do ‘Asian Lives Matter’ too? Impact trajectories of organisation activism on wellbeing of ethnic minority communities
• Illuminating luciferin bioluminescence in dinoflagellates
• Imaging quantum materials with an XFEL
• Impact of neuromodulating drugs on gut microbiome homeostasis
• Impact of pharmaceuticals in the marine environment in a changing world
• Impacts of environmental change on coastal habitat restoration
• Improving subsea navigation using environment observations for long term autonomy
• Information theoretic methods for sensor management
• Installation effect on the noise of small high speed fans
• Integrated earth observation mapping change land sea
• Interconnections of past greenhouse climates
• Investigating IgG cell depletion mechanisms
• Is ocean mixing upside down? How mixing processes drive upwelling in a deep-ocean basin
• Landing gear aerodynamics and aeroacoustics
• Lightweight gas storage: real-world strategies for the hydrogen economy
• Long-term change in the benthos – creating robust data from varying camera systems
• Machine learning for multi-robot perception
• Marine ecosystem responses to past climate change and its oceanographic impacts
• Mechanical effects in the surf zone - in situ electrochemical sensing
• Microfluidic cell isolation systems for sepsis
• Migrant entrepreneurship, gender and generation: context and family dynamics in small town Britain
• Miniaturisation in fishes: evolutionary and ecological perspectives
• Modelling high-power fibre laser and amplifier stability
• Modelling soil dewatering and recharge for cost-effective and climate resilient infrastructure
• Modelling the evolution of adaptive responses to climate change across spatial landscapes
• Nanomaterials sensors for biomedicine and/or the environment
• New high-resolution observations of ocean surface current and winds from innovative airborne and satellite measurements
• New perspectives on ocean photosynthesis
• Novel methods of detecting carbon cycling pathways in lakes and their impact on ecosystem change
• Novel technologies for cyber-physical security
• Novel transparent conducting films with unusual optoelectronic properties
• Novel wavelength fibre lasers for industrial applications
• Ocean circulation and the Southern Ocean carbon sink
• Ocean influence on recent climate extremes
• Ocean methane sensing using novel surface plasmon resonance technology
• Ocean physics and ecology: can robots disentangle the mix?
• Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal: Assessing the utility of coastal enhanced weathering
• Offshore renewable energy (ORE) foundations on rock seabeds: advancing design through analogue testing and modelling
• Optical fibre sensing for acoustic leak detection in buried pipelines
• Optimal energy transfer in nonlinear systems
• Optimizing machine learning for embedded systems
• Oxidation of fossil organic matter as a source of atmospheric CO2
• Partnership dissolution and re-formation in later life among individuals from minority ethnic communities in the UK
• Personalized multimodal human-robot interactions
• Preventing disease by enhancing the cleaning power of domestic water taps using sound
• Quantifying riparian vegetation dynamics and flow interactions for Nature Based Solutions using novel environmental sensing techniques
• Quantifying the response and sensitivity of tropical forest carbon sinks to various drivers
• Quantifying variability in phytoplankton electron requirements for carbon fixation
• Resilient and sustainable steel-framed building structures
• Resolving Antarctic meltwater events in Southern Ocean marine sediments and exploring their significance using climate models
• Robust acoustic leak detection in water pipes using contact sound guides
• Silicon synapses for artificial intelligence hardware
• Smart photon delivery via reconfigurable optical fibres
• The Gulf Stream control of the North Atlantic carbon sink
• The Mayflower Studentship: a prestigious fully funded PhD studentship in bioscience
• The calming effect of group living in social fishes
• The duration of ridge flank hydrothermal exchange and its role in global biogeochemical cycles
• The evolution of symmetry in echinoderms
• The impact of early life stress on neuronal enhancer function
• The oceanic fingerprints on changing monsoons over South and Southeast Asia
• The role of iron in nitrogen fixation and photosynthesis in changing polar oceans
• The role of singlet oxygen signaling in plant responses to heat and drought stress
• Time variability on turbulent mixing of heat around melting ice in the West Antarctic
• Triggers and Feedbacks of Climate Tipping Points
• Uncovering the drivers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease progression using patient derived organoids
• Understanding recent land-use change in Snowdonia to plan a sustainable future for uplands: integrating palaeoecology and conservation practice
• Understanding the role of cell motility in resource acquisition by marine phytoplankton
• Understanding the structure and engagement of personal networks that support older people with complex care needs in marginalised communities and their ability to adapt to increasingly ‘digitalised’ health and social care
• Unpicking the Anthropocene in the Hawaiian Archipelago
• Unraveling oceanic multi-element cycles using single cell ionomics
• Unravelling southwest Indian Ocean biological productivity and physics: a machine learning approach
• Using acoustics to monitor how small cracks develop into bursts in pipelines
• Using machine learning to improve predictions of ocean carbon storage by marine life
• Vulnerability of low-lying coastal transportation networks to natural hazards
• Wideband fibre optical parametric amplifiers for Space Division Multiplexing technology
• Will it stick? Exploring the role of turbulence and biological glues on ocean carbon storage
• X-ray imaging and property characterisation of porous materials
• Postgraduate Taught Diversity Scholarship (Environmental and Life Sciences)
• Southampton Business School Postgraduate UK Scholarship
• Southampton Genomics Talent Scholarship
• Southampton History Patricia Mather and Helen Patterson Scholarship
• Southampton MA Holocaust scholarships
• Southampton Philosophy David Humphris-Norman Scholarship
• Southampton Physics and Astronomy Achievement Scholarship
• GREAT Scholarships 2024 – Greece
• Undergraduate scholarships for UK students
• Winchester School of Art Postgraduate Global Talent Scholarship
• Southampton University Corporate Civil Engineering Scholarship Scheme
• Merit scholarships for international postgraduates
• Merit scholarships for international undergraduates
• Scholarships, awards and funding opportunities
• Becas Chile Scholarship
• Chevening Scholarships
• China Scholarship Council Scholarships
• COLFUTURO Scholarships
• Commonwealth Distance Learning Scholarships
• Commonwealth Master's Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships for high income countries
• Commonwealth Shared Scholarships
• Commonwealth Split-Site Scholarships
• FIDERH Scholarships
• Fulbright Awards
• FUNED Scholarships
• Great Scholarships 2024 – India
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Bangladesh
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Mexico
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Nigeria
• Marshall Scholarship
• Saïd Foundation Scholarships
• British Council Scholarships for Women in STEM
• Xiamen University PhD Scholarships
• GREAT scholarships for justice and law 2024 – Indonesia
• Scholarship terms and conditions
• Southampton Canadian Prestige Scholarship for Law
• Southampton Presidential International Scholarship
• Continuing professional development
• Archers Road
• City Gateway
• Erasmus Park
• Highfield Hall
• Lucia Foster Welch
• Orion Point
• Wessex Lane
• Cancer Sciences Protein Facility
• Geotechnical Centrifuge
• Maritime Robotics and Instrumentation Laboratory (MRIL)
• Active Living
• Advanced Fibre Applications
• Advanced Laser Laboratory
• Advanced Project Management Research Centre
• Antibody and Vaccine Group
• Astronomy Group
• Autism Community Research Network @ Southampton (ACoRNS)
• Bioarchaeology and Osteoarchaeology at Southampton (BOS)
• Bladder and Bowel Management
• Cell and Developmental Biology
• Centre for Defence and Security Research
• Centre for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease
• Centre for Digital Finance
• Centre for Eastern European and Eurasian Studies (CEEES)
• Centre for Empirical Research in Finance and Banking (CERFIB)
• Centre for Geometry, Topology, and Applications
• Centre for Global Englishes
• Centre for Global Health and Policy (GHaP)
• Centre for Health Technologies
• Centre for Healthcare Analytics
• Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration
• Centre for Imperial and Postcolonial Studies
• Centre for Inclusive and Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CISEI)
• Centre for International Film Research (CIFR)
• Centre for International Law and Globalisation
• Centre for Internet of Things and Pervasive Systems
• Centre for Justice Studies
• Centre for Linguistics, Language Education and Acquisition Research
• Centre for Machine Intelligence
• Centre for Maritime Archaeology
• Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Culture (CMRC)
• Centre for Modern and Contemporary Writing (CMCW)
• Centre for Music Education and Social Justice
• Centre for Political Ethnography (CPE)
• Centre for Research in Accounting, Accountability and Governance
• Centre for Research on Work and Organisations
• Centre for Resilient Socio-Technical Systems
• Centre for Transnational Studies
• Child and Adolescent Research Group
• Clinical Ethics, Law and Society (CELS)
• Computational Nonlinear Optics
• Cyber Security Academy
• Data Science Group
• Digital Oceans
• EPSRC and MOD Centre for Doctoral Training in Complex Integrated Systems for Defence and Security
• Economic Theory and Experimental Economics
• Economy, Society and Governance
• Electrical Power Engineering
• Environmental Hydraulics
• Gas Photonics in Hollow Core Fibres 
• Geochemistry
• Global Health (Demography)
• Global Health Community of Practice
• Gravity group
• Healthy Oceans
• High Power Fibre Lasers
• Hollow Core Fibre
• Human Genetics and Genomic Medicine
• Infrastructure Group
• Institute of Maritime Law (IML)
• Integrated Photonic Devices
• Integrative Molecular Phenotyping Centre
• Interdisciplinary Musculoskeletal Health
• International Centre for Ecohydraulics Research (ICER)
• Language Assessment and Testing Unit (LATU)
• Laser-Direct-Write (LDW) Technologies for Biomedical Applications
• Law and Technology Centre
• Long Term Conditions
• Magnetic Resonance
• Mathematical Modelling
• Medicines Management
• Molecular and Precision Biosciences
• Multiwavelength Accretion and Astronomical Transients
• National Biofilms Innovation Centre (NBIC)
• National Centre for Research Methods
• National Infrastructure Laboratory
• Nature-Based Ocean Solutions
• Nonlinear Semiconductor Photonics
• Ocean Perception Group
• Operational Research
• Optical Engineering and Quantum Photonics Group
• Paediatrics and Child Health - Clinical and Experimental Sciences
• People, Property, Community
• Photonic Systems, Circuits and Sensors Group
• Physical Optics
• Primary Care Research Centre
• Product Returns Research Group (PRRG)
• Quantum, Light and Matter Group
• Silica Fibre Fabrication
• Silicon Photonics
• Skin Sensing Research Group
• Southampton Centre for Nineteenth-Century Research
• Southampton Ethics Centre
• Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC)
• Southampton High Energy Physics group
• Southampton Imaging
• Southampton Theory Astrophysics and Gravity (STAG) Research Centre
• Stefan Cross Centre for Women, Equality and Law
• String theory and holography
• The India Centre for Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development
• The Parkes Institute
• Tony Davies High Voltage Laboratory
• Ultrafast X-ray Group
• Vision Science
• Work Futures Research Centre (WFRC)
• Departments

• Schools & departments

Section E: assessment decisions

Regulations 50 - 68: Undergraduate and postgraduate progression, degree award, postgraduate merit and distinction, credit from other universities.

Regulation 50 Award of degrees, diplomas and certificates

Degrees, diplomas and certificates are awarded by the Senatus on the basis of Board of Examiners’ recommendations.  Each honours programme of study, the MBChB and the BVM&S, has a Board of Examiners responsible for recommending the award of the degree and determining the classification of the degree.  Each postgraduate degree, diploma or certificate examination has a Board of Examiners responsible both for determining progression to diploma/masters dissertation (on programmes where there is an identifiable taught component followed by a dissertation/research project) and for determining the final award of the qualification. 

Application of the regulation

50.1 Information on the criteria for award of degrees, diplomas and certificates is published in advance.

Regulation 51 Undergraduate progression: pre-honours and into honours

To progress to the next year of study and into honours, students must meet the requirements for progression which are specified in the Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study and degree programme tables.

Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study

51.1 The Undergraduate Progression Board has responsibility for ensuring that students have met the requirements for progression, on the basis of information provided by Boards of Examiners. 

51.2 The requirements for degrees are set out in the University’s Curriculum Framework:

Regulation 52 Undergraduate honours assessment progression

The Undergraduate Progression Board has the responsibility to decide which students can progress to the next year of honours study.  Progressing students must:

(a) pass at least 80 credits at SCQF level 9 or above in junior honours and level 10 or above in senior honours for undergraduate Masters degrees; and

(b) have an overall average of 40% or more for the 120 credits of study taken in the relevant honours year; and

(c) must satisfy any other specific requirements for the degree programme, as published in the programme handbook. 

When all the marks for the taught components of the relevant year of the programme (120 credits) are available, if the student has achieved PASS marks in at least 80 credits and has an overall average of 40% or more over the full 120 credits, then they will be awarded credits on aggregate for the failed courses.

52.1 The Undergraduate Progression Board has responsibility for ensuring that students have met the requirements for progression, on the basis of information provided by Boards of Examiners. 

52.2 The requirements for degrees are set out in the University’s Curriculum Framework:

52.3 In general failed courses are not included in the student’s transcript, but any failed course for which the student has been awarded credits on aggregate must be shown in the transcript as a fail but with credit on aggregate. In reporting course marks, Schools are required to upload a fail but with credit on aggregate outcome on to the student record system, in addition to other final course marks.

52.4 PASS marks are defined in the “PASS” section (A1 to PS) of “Recording of Course Assessment Results within EUCLID”, as are EUCLID grades for Credit on aggregate (AA, CA and UA).

Assessment results

52.5 Where a student studies abroad for a single semester in the junior Honours year, decisions regarding eligibility for credit on aggregate are made separately for the semester spent studying abroad and the semester spent in Edinburgh. Students are eligible for up to 20 credits to be awarded on aggregate in each semester, in line with the criteria above.

Regulation 53 Award of undergraduate Ordinary and General degrees

Students registered for an Ordinary or General (non-Honours) degree may be awarded the degree if they satisfy the requirements in the Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study.

53.1 The Board of Examiners or Undergraduate Progression Board may propose the award of an Ordinary or General degree to those students who have met the requirements of one of these degrees but who do not satisfy the honours degree requirements.

53.2 The Board of Examiners or Undergraduate Progression Board should take account of the recommendations of the Special Circumstances Committee and the student’s general academic record when determining the award of a degree.  However, it is not within the power of a Board of Examiners or Undergraduate Progression Board to recommend the award of a degree without substantial evidence of attainment to   at least the lowest level required for the award of that qualification.  Boards of  Examiners or Undergraduate Progression Board may not be generous in cases of  failure other than within the limits already set out in these regulations.

Regulation 54 Undergraduate honours degree award

The Board of Examiners has the responsibility to decide which students can be awarded a classified honours degree.  To graduate students must:

(a)  pass at least 80 credits at SCQF level 10 or above in their final honours year; and

(b)  have an overall average of 40% or more for the 120 credits of final honours; and

(c)  must satisfy any other specific requirements for the degree programme.

When all the marks for the taught components of the final year of the programme (120 credits) are available, if the student has achieved PASS marks in at least 80 credits and has an overall average of 40% or more over the full 120 credits, then they will be awarded credits on aggregate for the failed courses.

54.1 The requirements for degrees are set out in the University’s Curriculum Framework:

54.2 In general failed courses are not included in the student’s transcript, but any failed course for which the student has been awarded credits on aggregate must be shown in the transcript as a fail but with credit on aggregate.  In reporting course marks, Schools are required to upload a fail but with credit on aggregate outcome on to the student record system, along with other final course marks.

54.3 The Board of Examiners may propose the award of an Ordinary or General degree be made to students who do not achieve the honours classification requirements, on the basis of their honours achievements.

54.4 The Board of Examiners may propose the award of an honours degree to students who do not achieve the requirements for an undergraduate masters, on the basis of their senior honours achievements.

54.5 The Board of Examiners should take account of the recommendations of the Special Circumstances Committee and of the student’s general academic record, when determining the classification and award of a degree.  However, it is not within the power of a Board of Examiners to recommend the award of a degree without substantial evidence of attainment to at least the lowest level required for the award of that qualification or classification.  Boards of Examiners may not be generous in cases of failure other than within the limits already set out in these regulations.

54.6 PASS marks are defined in the “PASS” section (A1 to PS) of “Recording of Course Assessment Results within EUCLID”.

Regulation 55 Undergraduate degree classification

The Board of Examiners for assessment of students in their final year is responsible for deriving the classification for award of an honours degree. Degree classification is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.  Exceptions are outlined in the guidance on the regulation.

55.1 The assessment weighting of a course within the classification calculation is proportional to its credit value.

55.2 For degrees with two honours years, including degree programmes with an obligatory period of residence/study abroad, the classification is based on a credit-weighted average of performance across both honours years, except for:

(a) modern language degree programmes with a prescribed period of residence abroad where credit points for language acquisition through residence are aggregated with those associated with the language learning in the final year and where the classification is based on two honours years in line with this aggregation;

(b) degree programmes where students can opt to spend a period of residence/study abroad, where credits will be allocated for the study abroad but these are weighted zero in the final classification;

(c) the MA in International Business and the LLB in Global Law where the classification for these students is based solely on the final honours year; and

(d) the BSc Honours degrees in the School of Biological Sciences and Deanery of Biomedical Sciences which are weighted 2:1 Senior: Junior Honours; and the BSc degrees in Chemistry which are weighted 2:1 Senior: Junior Honours.

55.3 Integrated Masters degrees have three honours years and their classification is based on all these years, in which the three honours years are weighted respectively 20, 40, 40 (in percentage terms), with the exception of:

• the MPhys degrees “with a Year Abroad” which are weighted 20, 20, 60; and
• the  Geophysics degrees (with a placement year) which are weighted 30,30,40.

55.4 The relevant Board of Examiners will specify which courses will be used for classification purposes for students who exit with a BSc who were previously on an Integrated Masters degree.

55.5 Intercalated honours degrees have a one-year honours component and their classification is based solely on the honours year. Degree classification is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.

55.6 Honours degree programmes in the Art and Design subject areas (except the MA Fine Art) within Edinburgh College of Art calculate classification based solely on performance the final honours year.

55.7 Classification models for credit for study abroad are contained in the College Progression Boards for Optional Study Abroad: Terms of Reference.

Regulation 56 Postgraduate assessment progression

For programmes where there is an identifiable taught component followed by a project or dissertation component, students must pass the assessment requirements of the taught stage at an appropriate level at the first attempt before progression to the dissertation.  In order to progress to the masters dissertation students must:

(a) pass at least 80 credits with a mark of at least 50% in each of the courses which make up these credits; and

(b) attain an average of at least 50% for the 120 credits of study examined at the point of decision for progression; and

(c) satisfy any other specific requirements for the masters degree programme, that are clearly stated in respective programme handbooks.

When all the marks for the taught components of the programme (120 credits) are available, if the student has achieved PASS marks in at least 80 credits and has an overall average of 40% or more over the full 120 credits, then they will be awarded credits on aggregate for the failed courses.

For programmes where the taught and project or dissertation components are taken in parallel, or where there are not identifiable taught and research project or dissertation components,  the requirements for progression are determined at programme level, stated in the Programme Handbook.

56.1 For programmes where there is an identifiable taught component followed by a project / dissertation component (e.g. 120 credits of taught courses in semesters 1 and 2, followed by a 60 credit project / dissertation component):

(a) Postgraduate Boards of Examiners are normally convened at least twice during the year for full-time students. The initial meeting to decide matters relating to progression (to masters), or failure, is held at the end of the coursework component. A second meeting to consider the dissertation results and the final award of degrees (or diplomas) is held soon after completion of the programme. Both meetings are equally important.

(b) The Postgraduate Board of Examiners has the responsibility to decide which students can progress to the dissertation required for candidature for the award of a masters degree; or, in the case of other awards, exit either directly or following satisfaction of any outstanding requirement.

(c) Exceptionally, with the permission of the relevant College Committee, a student who has been unable to sit an assessment because of illness or other extenuating circumstance may, if that circumstance is certified, be allowed to progress to the dissertation stage prior to completion of the coursework assessment on condition that the dissertation will subsequently be set aside if the student is eventually unsuccessful in the coursework element of the programme.

56.2 For MFA programmes (240 credits) where there is an identifiable taught component, in order to progress to masters dissertation/project the student must pass at least 120 credits with a mark of at least 50% in each of the courses which make up these credits, and attain an average of at least 50% for the 180 credits of study examined at the point of decision for progression to dissertation/project, and satisfy any other requirements as outlined in 56 (c) above.

56.3 For postgraduate taught programmes involving 360 credits, information regarding progression requirements is included in the relevant programme handbook.

56.4 The average for the courses is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.  Courses where credit has been obtained by recognition of prior learning are excluded from the average, except where the credit was awarded for the certificate or diploma associated with the masters degree.

56.5 In general failed courses are not included in the student’s transcript, but any failed course for which the student has been awarded credits on aggregate must be shown in the transcript as a fail but with credit on aggregate.  In reporting course marks, Schools are required to upload a fail but with credit on aggregate outcome on to the student record system, along with other final course marks.

56.6 In Regulation 56(a) above, where some of the 80 credits are pass/fail courses, then where these courses are passed, they can be included in the 80 credit total. However, pass/fail courses are excluded from the calculation under Regulation 56(b).

C ommon marking scheme

56.7 PASS marks are defined in the “PASS” section (A1 to PS) of “Recording of Course Assessment Results within EUCLID”

56.8  For MBA programmes (180 credits) where there is an identifiable taught component, in order to progress to the Capstone Project the student must pass at least 110 credits with a mark of at least 50% in each of the courses which make up these credits, and attain an average of at least 50% for the credits of study examined at the point of decision for progression, and satisfy any other requirements as outlined in 56 (c) above. If the student does not meet the progression criteria above, but is in a position to be able to meet the criteria based on the outcome of the outstanding credits, the progression decision will be deferred until the result of the outstanding credits are known.

56. 9 For the EMBA programme and Online MBA programmes (180 credits) where there is an identifiable taught component, in order to progress to the 40 credit Capstone project the student must pass at least 100 credits with a mark of at least 50% in each of the courses which make up these credits, and attain an average of at least 50% for the credits of study examined at the point of decision for progression, and satisfy any other requirements as outlined in 56 (c) above. In order to progress to the 30 credit Capstone project, the student must pass at least 110 credits with a mark of at least 50% in each of the courses which make up these credits, and attain an average of at least 50% for the credits of study examined at the point of decision for progression, and satisfy any other requirements as outlined in 56 (c) above. If the student does not meet the progression criteria above, but is in a position to be able to meet the criteria based on the outcome of outstanding credits, the progression decision will be deferred until the result of the outstanding credits are known.

Regulation 57 Postgraduate degree, diploma and certificate award

In order to be awarded the certificate students must:

(a) pass at least 40 credits with a mark of at least 40%; and

(b) attain an average of at least 40% for the 60 credits of study examined for the certificate; and

(c) satisfy any other specific requirements for the named certificate that are clearly stated in respective programme handbooks.

In order to be awarded the diploma students must:

(a) pass at least 80 credits with a mark of at least 40%; and

(b) attain an average of at least 40% for the 120 credits of study examined for the diploma; and

(c) satisfy any other specific requirements for the named diploma that are clearly stated in respective programme handbooks.

In order to be awarded a masters degree students must:

(a) have satisfied any requirements for progression, as laid out in taught assessment regulation 56 above, and

(b) attain an additional 60 credits, by achieving a mark of at least 50% for the dissertation or project component (if the programme has a dissertation or project element) and

(c) satisfy any other specific requirements for the masters degree programme, that are clearly stated in respective Programme Handbooks.

When all the marks for the taught components of the programme or diploma are available, if the student has achieved a mark of at least 40% in at least 80 credits and has an overall average of 40% or more over the full 120 credits, then they will be awarded credits on aggregate for the failed courses, up to a maximum of 40 credits.  For a certificate, a maximum of 20 credits may be awarded on aggregate.

57.1 Boards of Examiners, including those involving subjects from two or more of the Schools, are required to establish guidelines in advance on how the results of individual papers or units of assessment are to be aggregated, averaged or profiled to produce the overall final result.  These guidelines are an integral part of the disclosure process and must be published to students within one month of the start of the programme.

57.2 In line with the Postgraduate Degree Regulations, postgraduate taught programmes may include some courses at SCQF levels below 11. Where courses at SCQF level 9 or below are included in a programme, marks for these courses are disregarded for the purposes of calculating averages for the award of credit on aggregate, progression, award, and the award of Merit and Distinction.

57.3 The average for the courses is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.  Courses where credit has been obtained by recognition of prior learning are excluded from the average, except where the credit was awarded for the certificate or diploma associated with the masters degree.

57.4 In general failed courses are not included in the student’s transcript, but any failed course for which the student has been awarded credits on aggregate must be shown in the transcript as a fail but with credit on aggregate. Exam Boards must make this distinction clear when reporting course marks.

57.5 The Board of Examiners should take account of any relevant special circumstances and of the student’s general academic record, when determining the award of a degree.  However, it is not within the power of a Board of Examiners to recommend the award of a degree without substantial evidence of attainment to at least the lowest level required for the award of that qualification.  Boards of Examiners may not be generous in cases of failure other than within the limits already set out in these regulations.

57.6 The Postgraduate Degree Regulations permit a General Postgraduate Certificate or General Postgraduate Diploma to be attained by students who do not fulfil the requirements for a specific Certificate or Diploma award but who have attained the required volume and level of credits.

57.7 PASS marks are defined in the “PASS” section (A1 to PS) of “Recording of Course Assessment Results within EUCLID”

Regulation 58 Resubmission of postgraduate dissertations or research projects

Students may be permitted to resubmit the dissertation or research project in line with the provisions of the Special Circumstances Policy where a student’s performance in assessment has been affected by illness, accident or circumstances beyond their control (58.1-58.2).

Students are also entitled to one resubmission of the dissertation or research project for postgraduate Masters programmes where the student has achieved a mark of 45 to 49% at the first attempt (58.3-58.9).

58.1 Where a student is granted the opportunity to resubmit the dissertation or research project due to special circumstances, the Board of Examiners will be responsible for providing the student with a statement which outlines the deficiencies in their original submission, and agreeing an appropriate deadline and appropriate supervision. The student will be granted a null sit for their first attempt, and the recorded mark for their revised dissertation or project will not be capped. Paragraphs 58.3 to 58.8 do not apply to students granted the opportunity to resubmit their dissertation or research project due to special circumstances.

58.2 Students who have been granted an opportunity to resubmit the dissertation or research project due to special circumstances may be permitted one further resubmission under this regulation (with reference to paragraphs 58.3 to 58.9), provided they meet the eligibility requirements.

58.3 Where a student receives 48 or 49% for the dissertation or research project at the first attempt, they may be considered as a borderline candidate for the award of the Master’s degree, in line with published information regarding consideration of borderline cases (see Regulation 44).

58.4 Since the concept of borderlines (see Regulation 44) does not apply to the threshold for entitlement to resubmit a dissertation or research project, Boards of Examiners are not able to permit students with marks of 43 or 44% at the first attempt to resubmit their dissertation or project unless special circumstances apply.

58.5 Students who achieve a mark of 45 to 49% for the dissertation or research project at the first attempt as a result of a marking penalty, either for late submission or for academic misconduct, are entitled to one resubmission, in line with this regulation.

58.6 The relevant Board of Examiners will provide a student permitted to submit a revised dissertation or research project with a statement which outlines the deficiencies in their original submission. The student is also entitled to receive further written advice from their dissertation or research project supervisor on one occasion before resubmission. The student must include with their revised dissertation a statement outlining the changes made to the previous submission. This statement will not be marked.

58.7 The Board of Examiners will advise the student of the deadline for submission of their revised dissertation or research project, which will be three months from the date of the student receiving notification of their original result. Extension requests and special circumstances submissions in relation to this deadline will be handled in line with provisions outlined within the Taught Assessment Regulations and the Special Circumstances Policy. Where special circumstances affect the resubmission, Boards of Examiners are permitted to offer a further resubmission under the Special Circumstances Policy, if they consider this appropriate. The mark for a dissertation resubmitted under these circumstances will be capped at 50%, in line with Regulation 58.9.

58.8 Where a student declines the opportunity to resubmit the dissertation or research project, or fails to submit by the stated deadline, the mark they had received for their first attempt will be treated as final and they will be considered for a relevant exit award.

58.9 If the Board of Examiners agrees that the revised dissertation or research project meets the requirements for a pass at Masters level, the student will be awarded the Masters degree. The recorded mark for the revised dissertation or research project will be capped at 50%.

58.10  For MBA programmes students are entitled to one resubmission of the Capstone Project where the student has achieved a mark of 40 to 49% at the first attempt. The Board of Examiners will advise the student of the deadline for submission of their revised Capstone Project, which will be two months from the first meeting meeting/communication with the supervisor to complete the work. Since the concept of borderlines (see Regulation 44) does not apply to the threshold for entitlement to resubmit a Capstone Project, Boards of Examiners are not able to permit students with marks of 38 or 39% at the first attempt to resubmit their Capstone Project unless special circumstances apply. Regulations 58.1-3 and 58.5-9 also apply.

Regulation 59 Award of postgraduate merit

Taught postgraduate degrees may be awarded with merit. To achieve a merit, a student must be awarded at least 60% on the University’s Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme for the dissertation, if the programme has a dissertation element, and must achieve an average of at least 60% in the remaining elements. Borderlines, for both the dissertation and course average elements, are considered for merits.

59.1 Merit may be awarded for postgraduate taught masters, diplomas and certificates.

59.2 Where a student has been permitted to resubmit their dissertation or research project in line with Regulation 58 (except where Special Circumstances apply), they are not eligible for the award of the degree with merit.

59.3 For degrees which use letter grades in addition to numerical marks, the award of merit will be made where the student meets the above criteria using the numerical mark.

59.4 For MFA, the award of merit relates only to grades obtained at stages 3 and 4 (Year 2).

59.5 Borderline marks are defined as marks from two percentage points below the boundary up to the boundary itself, e.g. 58.00% to 59.99% for the dissertation and for the average of other courses.  See also taught assessment regulation 44 above.

59.6 The average for the courses is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.  Courses where credit has been obtained by recognition of prior learning are excluded from the average, except where the credit was awarded for the certificate or diploma associated with the masters degree.

59.7 The Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme can be found at:

Common marking scheme

Regulation 60 Award of postgraduate distinction

Taught postgraduate degrees may be awarded with distinction. To achieve a distinction, a student must be awarded at least 70% on the University’s Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme for the dissertation, if the programme has a dissertation element, and must achieve an average of at least 70% in the remaining elements. Borderlines, for both the dissertation and course average elements, are considered for distinctions.

60.1 Distinctions may be awarded for postgraduate taught masters, diplomas and certificates.

60.2 Where a student has been permitted to resubmit their dissertation or research project in line with Regulation 58 (except where Special Circumstances apply), they are not eligible for the award of the degree with distinction.

60.3 For degree programmes which use letter grades in addition to numerical marks, the award of distinction will be made where the student meets the above criteria using the numerical mark.

60.4 For MFA, the award of distinction relates only to grades obtained at stages 3 and 4 (Year 2).

60.5 Borderline marks are defined as marks from two percentage points below boundary up to the boundary itself, e.g. 68.00% to 69.99% for the dissertation and for the average of other courses.  See also taught assessment regulation 44 above.

60.6 The average for the courses is derived by calculating the mean of marks of the individual courses, weighted by the number of credit points of each course.  Courses where credit has been obtained by recognition of prior learning are excluded from the average, except where the credit was awarded for the certificate or diploma associated with the masters degree.

60.7 The Postgraduate Common Marking Scheme can be found at:

Regulation 61 Award of credit from other universities

Boards of Examiners confirm the award of credit from other universities which is used in the award of a University of Edinburgh degree.

61.1 There are two types of credit from external bodies: recognition of prior credit at admission, determined by Colleges against published criteria; and recognition of external learning whilst on programme. In both cases recognition of prior learning is recorded on admission.

Regulation 62 Minuting of decisions of Boards of Examiners

The internal and External Examiners must concur in the mark and grade to be awarded to each student and in the classification and award of degree to be made.  Boards of Examiners must record all decisions in the minutes of the meeting.

62.1 Once the Board of Examiners has decided on the final marks, grades and if appropriate, class of degree and award for each student, the students’ names must then made visible to the Board of Examiners.  There must then be a final check of the results before the list is agreed and recorded in the minutes.  Only in the event of detection of an error, which was not detectable when examination numbers were used, can changes be made to the marks, grades or class of degree at this stage.  Any such change should be recorded in the minutes.

Boards of Examiners

62.2 The Convener receives and is responsible for ensuring that the minutes of the Board of Examiners’ meetings are an accurate record of the meeting and of the approved results.

62.3 Minutes should include:

(a) a record of the names of the examiners and those in attendance at the meeting;

(b) relevant information considered at the meeting or by the Special Circumstances Committee, and outcomes from this;

(c) discussion and outcomes of borderline cases;

(d) details of any modification of marks, grades or classification, and the reasons for these; and

(e) comments by the External Examiner(s) about the examination of the course, the performance of the students in general, and their approval of results agreed by the Board of Examiners. 

62.4 The minute is a confidential document, although information on a particular student may need to be disclosed to that student under the Data Protection Act and generic information may need to be disclosed under Freedom of Information. Further information is available at:

62.5 If agreement cannot be reached on concurrence of decisions then the issue is referred to the Head of College.

Regulation 63 Board of Examiners: return of marks

Assessment and course results, degree classification and awards agreed by the Board of Examiners and confirmed by the External Examiner(s) must be recorded on the student record system as the final official results of the University.

63.1 Schools have responsibility for ensuring that final results are displayed accurately in the student record system. More than one person should be involved in checking their accuracy.  

63.2 When marks for courses are finalised (and not before then), they must be rounded to an integer, i.e. with no decimal places.  Any mark which is xx.50 or above is rounded up and any mark which is xx.49 or below is rounded down, e.g. 59.50% is rounded to 60%, 59.49% is rounded to 59%.  Individual course marks must be rounded before they are released to students and the rounded marks must be used in calculating the overall mean mark.  The overall mean mark is to be used in Honours classification, progression, and award decisions.  The overall mean mark is not rounded.

63.3 Schools have responsibility for uploading course results and final award outcomes in line with the deadlines published each year by Student Systems.

63.4 In the case of autumn (August) undergraduate examinations, results should be submitted as soon as possible and not later than 10 days before the start of the next semester.

63.5 Provisional marks for components of assessment may also be released to students via the student record system (see regulation 36)

Regulation 64 Status of decisions

Decisions by a Board of Examiners, once certified in writing, are final.  In exceptional circumstances a Convener of the Board of Examiners can reconvene the Board to review a decision.

64.1 A Board of Examiners may, at the request of any of its members or member of the Special Circumstances Committee, review a decision if significant information relevant to that decision, which was unavailable at the time the decision was made, comes to light, or if any error having a material bearing on that decision, or an error in the written certification of that decision, has been made. A member of the Board may request a review but it is the Convener who must review the decision in the light of any new significant information or error. Therefore it is the Convener, and not a member of the Board, who decides whether to reconvene the Board.  Where the significant information presented would constitute special circumstances under the Special Circumstances Policy, the Board of Examiners should only consider this information where it believes that there is a good reason why the student did not make the information available in advance of the Board’s original decision.

64.2 If the Board is satisfied that there are grounds for varying the decision, the Board shall report its decision to Student Systems

64.3 Where an error is discovered in the assessment or marking of any examination or any component of an examination or in the calculation, recording or notification of the result of any examination or any component thereof or in the classification or result of any degree or in any process connected with any of these matters, the University shall correct that error and amend its records to show the correct result or classification and that whether or not the result or classification has been published or otherwise notified to the student. The University shall notify the student of the corrected result or classification as soon as practicable and shall also correct any reference or statement which may have been provided by the University whether to the student or to a third party. Where such an error affects degree award or classification, the School should contact the relevant College and Academic Services for approval before notifying the student of any change. Having been notified of the corrected result or classification the student shall return to the University any documentation which may have been issued to the student notifying the original result or classification which has been corrected.  The student shall have no claim against the University for any loss or damage which may have been incurred by the student as a result of any error which may have been made.

64.4 In proved cases of substantial and significant copying, plagiarism or other fraud, the  Senatus has the power to reduce the classification of, or to revoke, any degree it has already awarded, and to require the degree, diploma or certificate scroll to be returned.

64.5 Any member of Senatus may request Senatus to refer for investigation any matter concerning examinations.

Regulation 65 Convener’s Action

The Convener of the Board of Examiners, Progression Board, or Special Circumstances Committee may take decisions by Convener’s Action.

65.1 This may occur when the Board of Examiners takes a decision in principle but needs confirmation or further information, or when the Board, or Special Circumstances Committee considers the possible outcomes and authorises the Convener, once relevant information is known, to apply the appropriate option. Convener’s Action may also be appropriate when the decision to be made follows an existing precedent.

65.2 Decisions made by Convener’s Action should be recorded and reported to the relevant Board or Committee.

Regulation 66 Failure to complete all the assessment requirements of a degree programme

When a student fails to complete all the assessment requirements of a degree programme the Board of Examiners or Undergraduate Progression Board will investigate the case.  If there is no satisfactory reason then taught assessment regulation 67 on unsatisfactory progress applies.  If the Special Circumstances Committee for the relevant Board of Examiners (including Progression Boards) is given sufficient evidence that the performance of a student has been affected for reasons of illness, accident or other circumstances beyond the student’s control, the University’s Special Circumstances Policy applies.

66.1 The University’s Special Circumstances Policy is available at:

Regulation 67 Unsatisfactory academic progress

The University may exclude students who do not meet the criteria for progression and award on their programme.

67.1 Degree regulations, Degree Programme Tables, programme handbooks and/or course handbooks must contain details of the progress which students are expected to achieve within given periods. They must also include warnings that students are liable to be considered for exclusion if these expectations are not met.

67.2 Where a student fails to meet the published progression criteria, the Procedure for Withdrawal and Exclusion from Studies will be used.

67.3 Some degree programmes leading to a professional qualification include Fitness to Practise considerations.  Any issues of unsatisfactory progress in relation to fitness to practise are dealt with according to the relevant College’s published Fitness to Practise procedures.

67.4 A student declared to have made unsatisfactory progress under professional Fitness to Practise requirements is normally excluded from all further attendance at classes and examinations leading to the professional qualification, but is entitled to apply to the College for permission to re-enter for assessment in a suitable alternative programme which does not lead to a professional qualification.

Regulation 68 Academic Appeal

​​​​​​​ Students have the right of academic appeal against the decisions of Boards of Examiners or Progression Boards on specific grounds, which are set out in the University’s Student Appeal Regulations .

Marks and feedback

Key information about pass marks, how credits are awarded and receiving feedback.

Pass marks for modules

You can find out more about pass marks for modules in our module information guide.

What is the pass mark for a module?

Receiving your marks

All of your coursework and exam marks are published in MYUWE (login required).

Unconfirmed marks will be released to students via MYUWE as soon as they are available. Please note that unconfirmed marks are subject to moderation by the Examination Board, so they may still go up or down. For this reason, please do not contact your module leader about unconfirmed exam marks that have been individually released in MYUWE.

Your unconfirmed marks should also normally be included on your work when it is returned to you.

The final agreed mark will be confirmed to you on the official publication date once the Examination Board process is complete.

Your marks will be recorded in the Higher Education Achievement Report (HEAR) , which is an electronic report that records your academic achievements.

If you think your mark has been recorded incorrectly, you should immediately draw this to the attention of your Student and Programme Support Team by completing a contact record form and produce the piece of work which you believe shows the correct mark.

If you have concerns about your modules you can speak to your Personal Tutor, a Student Support Adviser , or Student Representative (rep). Normally Student Reps only get involved with issues which affect more than a couple of students, so if you have an individual issue, you should still contact the Students’ Union Advice Centre or a Student Support Adviser.

You can see who your Student Reps are in Blackboard. It will display all the Reps within your programme and it will also place a * next to Reps who you share modules with.

Receiving feedback

All students have a minimum entitlement to assessment feedback on their assessed work. Normally you should get marks and feedback within 20 working days following the deadline for submission of the assessment, or following the end of the 48-hour late submission window  (if this was available for that assessment). This period exclude University closure days and may be shorter or longer for some forms of assessment.

Where the period is greater than 20 working days, you will be informed of the deadline and the reason.

Make sure you find out the specific arrangements for the return of your marked work.

What if I am given an adjusted deadline?

If you are eligible for reasonable adjustments and you have used the 14 day reasonable adjustment period, the period for providing feedback and an outcome will be an additional 14 days to the 20 working days for academic staff to provide your feedback.

If you have chosen to hand in your work during the 48-hour late submission window, the period for providing feedback will be 20 working days following the end of the 48-hour late submission window.

Once ready, your mark will be available in your MYUWE account, but you may see a non-submission (‘NS’) until this time.

How to use your assessment feedback

Find out more about how to make the most of your assessment feedback, including types of feedback and what to do next.

How credits are awarded

Credits are gained when modules are successfully completed. At UWE Bristol, modules are normally given values between five and 60 credits.

The number of credits assigned to a module is based on learning hours, ie the number of hours which it is expected that students will spend, on average, achieving the learning outcomes. One credit usually equals ten notional hours of study.

You become eligible for an award when you achieve sufficient credit in the required modules. Sometimes ‘module credits’ are described as being like a currency which can be accumulated and then ‘cashed in’ or exchanged when you accept an award (for example an honours or a master's degree).

You can find out more about credits and how they work in the degree classification section .

Recognising prior learning

If you have undertaken prior learning which is relevant to your modules or award, you may be able to apply for it to be recognised under the  Accreditation of Prior Learning or Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning processes .

What Happens if You Fail Your Dissertation?

In University by Think Student Editor February 9, 2023 Leave a Comment

A dissertation module is one of the key things that defines the step up from secondary school to university. It’s one of the biggest pieces of writing you’ll do for your degree, in terms of research and word count. It’s no mistake to think that a lot rests on a good dissertation. However, it’s always good to be prepared for the worst-case scenario. You’ve probably already asked the question – what actually happens if you do fail?

If you fail your dissertation for the first time at any degree level, you will be allowed one resubmission, which is usually capped at the pass mark. However, if you fail your dissertation resubmission, there are different consequences. If you fail your undergraduate dissertation, you can still graduate as long as you have enough credits, although this may be with an ordinary degree. However, if you fail your master’s dissertation or PhD thesis resubmission, you will not be allowed to graduate.

The topic of failure is quite daunting for most students. Not to worry! This article is here to help you understand failure criteria for a dissertation, and what happens in the event of failure.

Table of Contents

Is it possible to fail your dissertation?

Like with modules of your university course, unfortunately it is very much possible to fail your dissertation . Although this sounds daunting, don’t worry too much! Dissertations are not designed for you to fail.

The grading systems for university modules and dissertations are very similar . Across most universities, the pass mark for a dissertation is 40% or 50%. For example, check out this guide by Royal Holloway University, London to learn more about their dissertation grading.

This means that while it is certainly possible to fail your dissertation, it is unlikely that you actually will . However, in the event that you do fail your dissertation for whatever reason, don’t panic. Your university will usually let you resit your dissertation .

Keep in mind you’ll only be able to resit your dissertation once , so try your hardest to achieve the grade you want. For all the details you’ll need about a dissertation, I’d definitely recommend reading this Think Student article.

In summary, while it is possible to fail a dissertation (just like any other university module), a dissertation only requires a pass mark of 40%. Although a dissertation is different to a module, it is still pretty difficult to fail.

In the event you do fail your dissertation, don’t be too hard on yourself . Keep reading further to find out what happens if you fail your resit dissertation.

How bad does a dissertation need to be to fail?

To understand how “bad” a dissertation has to be to fail, you need to know what examiners are looking for.

Your university will have published the marking criteria for dissertations . These will normally feature comments on the key areas to earn marks in. As an example, check out the University of Edinburgh’s dissertation criteria here .

Therefore, if you failed your dissertation, it isn’t necessarily because you’re “bad at researching and writing”. To fail, it has to be the case that you didn’t meet the criteria to achieve a passing mark. It’s important to keep your confidence, so that you can do better when you resit.

If you haven’t written your dissertation yet, I’d definitely recommend looking through your university’s marking criteria. Similarly , your tutor will want to help you as much as possible, so you can ask them for advice if you’re really struggling .

If you’re seeking advice on how to write a dissertation, you should check out this Think Student article.

Can you graduate without passing your dissertation?

For an undergraduate degree, you can still graduate as long as you have enough credits to pass the other modules .

However , if your degree is a BSc or BA with Honours, if you fail your dissertation and the resit dissertation, you will graduate with an ordinary degree . You can read more about what an ordinary degree is in this Think Student article.

If you fail your first dissertation attempt, but pass your resit undergraduate dissertation, you will still pass with whatever class of degree you earned.

However, the rule is slightly different for master’s dissertations and a PhD thesis. These rules also depend on the university you attend .

At all universities, you are allowed one resit of coursework (dissertation is a form of coursework, as it is not a timed exam), even for a master’s degree and a PhD. However, if you fail your resit dissertation for your master’s degree, you cannot be awarded a master’s degree.

In the case of a PhD, you will not be able to graduate with a failed resit thesis . I’ll explain this in more detail later in the article, so keep reading!

What happens if you fail your master’s dissertation?

Failing your master’s dissertation for the first time isn’t ideal, but it isn’t the end of the world. You’re allowed a resit, which if you pass, means you can still graduate with a master’s degree.

However, a failure is a lot more serious if you fail your dissertation a second time . Failing a resit dissertation at master’s degree-level means you cannot graduate with a master’s degree.

This doesn’t mean you can’t be awarded anything at all for your effort. For example, the this page by the University of Nottingham states that if your dissertation is not passable but still “adequate”, you may still be awarded a diploma .

What happens if you fail your PhD thesis?

Like with an undergraduate or master’s degree, you’re allowed to resubmit your thesis once only . Given that you pass the resubmission, you’ll still be on track to graduate with a PhD.

Failing a PhD thesis resubmission means you cannot graduate. The pass mark for a PhD thesis is usually around 60 , such as at the University of Cambridge, which you can learn more about on their website, here .

In most cases, a PhD thesis will account for around 50% of the degree . Looking at it this way, it makes sense that if you failed half of your degree, you wouldn’t be able to graduate. A PhD is a research-based degree, and the thesis proves you have good research skills.

If you’d like to know more about how a PhD is graded, I’d recommend this Think Student article.

How often do students fail their dissertation?

As I established earlier, it’s pretty hard to fail your undergraduate dissertation module . It’s also quite hard to fail a master’s dissertation or a PhD thesis given the pass mark.

According to this article by The Healthy Journal, up to 50% of PhD students will not finish their thesis or graduate . This statistic sounds quite extreme, but keep in mind that not many people choose to complete a PhD because of the amount of time and money it takes.

If you really are concerned about failing your dissertation, speak to your tutor . They will have been in your position and will know how to help. Don’t struggle on your own!

Korolyov, Moscow oblast

FACILITY NAMES

Country: Russian Federation

City & Region: Korolyov, Moscow oblast, Europe

Latitude, Longitude: 55.924380, 37.877657

Contact Information

Management & budget, center status.

Status Last documented use

Status In use

Facility type

Category Filter Administrative

Type Immigration detention centre

Demographics

Name Adult men

Name Accompanied minors

Name Adult women

Name Families

Categories of detainees

Name Undocumented migrants (administrative)

SIZE & POPULATION

Length of detention, carceral indicators, segregation, communal space & activities, monitoring & access, telecommunications.

Receive the Latest Research on Immigration Detention Direct to your Inbox

Discover this place

• MyU : For Students, Faculty, and Staff

News Roundup Spring 2024

CEGE Spring Graduation Celebration and Order of the Engineer

Forty-seven graduates of the undergraduate and grad student programs (pictured above) in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering took part in the Order of the Engineer on graduation day. Distinguished Speakers at this departmental event included Katrina Kessler (MS EnvE 2021), Commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and student Brian Balquist. Following this event, students participated in the college-wide Commencement Ceremony at 3M Arena at Mariucci. 

UNIVERSITY & DEPARTMENT

The University of Minnesota’s Crookston, Duluth, and Rochester campuses have been awarded the Carnegie Elective Classification for Community Engagement, joining the Twin Cities (2006, 2015) and Morris campuses (2015), and making the U of M the country’s first and only university system at which every individual campus has received this selective designation. Only 368 from nearly 4,000 qualifying U.S. universities and colleges have been granted this designation.

CEGE contributed strongly to the College of Science and Engineering’s efforts toward sustainability research. CEGE researchers are bringing in over $35 million in funded research to study carbon mineralization, nature and urban areas, circularity of water resources, and global snowfall patterns. This news was highlighted in the Fall 2023 issue of  Inventing Tomorrow  (pages 10-11). https://issuu.com/inventingtomorrow/docs/fall_2023_inventing_tomorrow-web

CEGE’s new program for a one-year master’s degree in structural engineering is now accepting applicants for Fall 2024. We owe a big thanks to DAN MURPHY and LAURA AMUNDSON for their volunteer work to help curate the program with Professor JIA-LIANG LE and EBRAHIM SHEMSHADIAN, the program director. Potential students and companies interested in hosting a summer intern can contact Ebrahim Shemshadian ( [email protected] ).

BERNIE BULLERT , CEGE benefactor and MN Water Research Fund founder, was profiled on the website of the University of Minnesota Foundation (UMF). There you can read more about his mission to share clean water technologies with smaller communities in Minnesota. Many have joined Bullert in this mission. MWRF Recognizes their Generous 2024 Partners. Gold Partners: Bernie Bullert, Hawkins, Inc., Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and SL-serco. Silver Partners: ISG, Karl and Pam Streed, Kasco, Kelly Lange-Haider and Mark Haider, ME Simpson, Naeem Qureshi, Dr. Paul H. Boening, TKDA, and Waterous. Bronze Partners: Bruce R. Bullert; Brenda Lenz, Ph.D., APRN FNP-C, CNE; CDM Smith; Central States Water Environment Association (CSWEA MN); Heidi and Steve Hamilton; Jim “Bulldog” Sadler; Lisa and Del Cerney; Magney Construction; Sambatek; Shannon and John Wolkerstorfer; Stantec; and Tenon Systems.

After retiring from Baker-Tilly,  NICK DRAGISICH  (BCE 1977) has taken on a new role: City Council member in Lake Elmo, Minnesota. After earning his BCE from the University of Minnesota, Dragisich earned a master’s degree in business administration from the University of St. Thomas. Dragisich retired in May from his position as managing director at Baker Tilly, where he had previously served as firm director. Prior to that, he served as assistant city manager in Spokane, Washington, was the city administrator and city engineer in Virginia, Minnesota, and was mayor of Chisholm, Minnesota—all adding up to more than 40 years of experience in local government. Dragisich was selected by a unanimous vote. His current term expires in December 2024.

PAUL F. GNIRK  (Ph.D. 1966) passed away January 29, 2024, at the age of 86. A memorial service was held Saturday, February 24, at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (SDSM&T), where he started and ended his teaching career, though he had many other positions, professional and voluntary. In 2018 Paul was inducted into the SDSM&T Hardrocker Hall of Fame, and in 2022, he was inducted into the South Dakota Hall of Fame, joining his mother Adeline S. Gnirk, who had been inducted in 1987 for her work authoring nine books on the history of south central South Dakota.

ROGER M. HILL  (BCE 1957) passed away on January 13, 2024, at the age of 90. His daughter, Kelly Robinson, wrote to CEGE that Roger was “a dedicated Gopher fan until the end, and we enjoyed many football games together in recent years. Thank you for everything.”

KAUSER JAHAN  (Ph.D. 1993, advised by Walter Maier), PE, is now a civil and environmental engineering professor and department head at Henry M. Rowan College of Engineering. Jahan was awarded a 3-year (2022- 2025), $500,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The grant supports her project, “WaterWorks: Developing the New Generation of Workforce for Water/Wastewater Utilities,” for the development of educational tools that will expose and prepare today’s students for careers in water and wastewater utilities.

SAURA JOST  (BCE 2010, advised by Timothy LaPara) was elected to the St. Paul City Council for Ward 3. She is part of the historic group of women that make up the nation’s first all-female city council in a large city.

The 2024 ASCE Western Great Lakes Student Symposium combines several competitions for students involved in ASCE. CEGE sent a large contingent of competitors to Chicago. Each of the competition groups won awards: Ethics Paper 1st place Hans Lagerquist; Sustainable Solutions team 1st place overall in (qualifying them for the National competition in Utah in June); GeoWall 2nd place overall; Men’s Sprint for Concrete Canoe with rowers Sakthi Sundaram Saravanan and Owen McDonald 2nd place; Product Prototype for Concrete Canoe 2nd place; Steel Bridge (200 lb bridge weight) 2nd place in lightness; Scavenger Hunt 3rd place; and Aesthetics and Structural Efficiency for Steel Bridge 4th place.

Students competing on the Minnesota Environmental Engineers, Scientists, and Enthusiasts (MEESE) team earned second place in the Conference on the Environment undergraduate student design competition in November 2023. Erin Surdo is the MEESE Faculty Adviser. Pictured are NIKO DESHPANDE, ANNA RETTLER, and SYDNEY OLSON.

The CEGE CLASS OF 2023 raised money to help reduce the financial barrier for fellow students taking the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, a cost of $175 per test taker. As a result of this gift, they were able to make the exam more affordable for 15 current CEGE seniors. CEGE students who take the FE exam pass the first time at a rate well above national averages, demonstrating that CEGE does a great job of teaching engineering fundamentals. In 2023, 46 of 50 students passed the challenging exam on the first try.

This winter break, four CEGE students joined 10 other students from the College of Science and Engineering for the global seminar, Design for Life: Water in Tanzania. The students visited numerous sites in Tanzania, collected water source samples, designed rural water systems, and went on safari. Read the trip blog: http://globalblogs.cse.umn.edu/search/label/Tanzania%202024

Undergraduate Honor Student  MALIK KHADAR  (advised by Dr. Paul Capel) received honorable mention for the Computing Research Association (CRA) Outstanding Undergraduate Research Award for undergraduate students who show outstanding research potential in an area of computing research.

GRADUATE STUDENTS

AKASH BHAT  (advised by William Arnold) presented his Ph.D. defense on Friday, October 27, 2023. Bhat’s thesis is “Photolysis of fluorochemicals: Tracking fluorine, use of UV-LEDs, and computational insights.” Bhat’s work investigating the degradation of fluorinated compounds will assist in the future design of fluorinated chemicals such that persistent and/or toxic byproducts are not formed in the environment.

ETHAN BOTMEN  (advised by Bill Arnold) completed his Master of Science Final Exam February 28, 2024. His research topic was Degradation of Fluorinated Compounds by Nucleophilic Attack of Organo-fluorine Functional Groups.

XIATING CHEN , Ph.D. Candidate in Water Resources Engineering at the Saint Anthony Falls Laboratory is the recipient of the 2023 Nels Nelson Memorial Fellowship Award. Chen (advised by Xue Feng) is researching eco-hydrological functions of urban trees and other green infrastructure at both the local and watershed scale, through combined field observations and modeling approaches.

ALICE PRATES BISSO DAMBROZ  has been a Visiting Student Researcher at the University of Minnesota since last August, on a Doctoral Dissertation Research Award from Fulbright. Her CEGE advisor is Dr. Paul Capel. Dambroz is a fourth year Ph.D. student in Soil Science at Universidade Federal de Santa Maria in Brazil, where she studies with her adviser Jean Minella. Her research focuses on the hydrological monitoring of a small agricultural watershed in Southern Brazil, which is located on a transition area between volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Its topography, shallow soils, and land use make it prone to runoff and erosion processes.

Yielding to people in crosswalks should be a very pedestrian topic. Yet graduate student researchers  TIANYI LI, JOSHUA KLAVINS, TE XU, NIAZ MAHMUD ZAFRI  (Dept.of Urban and Regional Planning at Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology), and Professor Raphael Stern found that drivers often do not yield to pedestrians, but they are influenced by the markings around a crosswalk. Their work was picked up by the  Minnesota Reformer.

TIANYI LI  (Ph.D. student advised by Raphael Stern) also won the Dwight David Eisenhower Transportation (DDET) Fellowship for the third time! Li (center) and Stern (right) are pictured at the Federal Highway Administration with Latoya Jones, the program manager for the DDET Fellowship.

The Three Minute Thesis Contest and the Minnesota Nice trophy has become an annual tradition in CEGE. 2023’s winner was  EHSANUR RAHMAN , a Ph.D. student advised by Boya Xiong.

GUANJU (WILLIAM) WEI , a Ph.D. student advised by Judy Yang, is the recipient of the 2023 Heinz G. Stefan Fellowship. He presented his research entitled Microfluidic Investigation of the Biofilm Growth under Dynamic Fluid Environments and received his award at the St. Anthony Falls Research Laboratory April 9. The results of Wei's research can be used in industrial, medical, and scientific fields to control biofilm growth.

BILL ARNOLD  stars in an award-winning video about prairie potholes. The Prairie Potholes Project film was made with the University of Delaware and highlights Arnold’s NSF research. The official winners of the 2024 Environmental Communications Awards Competition Grand Prize are Jon Cox and Ben Hemmings who produced and directed the film. Graduate student Marcia Pacheco (CFANS/LAAS) and Bill Arnold are the on-screen stars.

Four faculty from CEGE join the Center for Transportation Studies Faculty and Research Scholars for FY24–25:  SEONGJIN CHOI, KETSON ROBERTO MAXIMIANO DOS SANTOS, PEDRAM MORTAZAVI,  and  BENJAMIN WORSFOLD . CTS Scholars are drawn from diverse fields including engineering, planning, computer science, environmental studies, and public policy.

XUE FENG  is coauthor on an article in  Nature Reviews Earth and Environment . The authors evaluate global plant responses to changing rainfall regimes that are now characterized by fewer and larger rainfall events. A news release written at Univ. of Maryland can be found here: https://webhost.essic. umd.edu/april-showers-bring-mayflowers- but-with-drizzles-or-downpours/ A long-running series of U of M research projects aimed at improving stormwater quality are beginning to see practical application by stormwater specialists from the Twin Cities metro area and beyond. JOHN GULLIVER has been studying best practices for stormwater management for about 16 years. Lately, he has focused specifically on mitigating phosphorous contamination. His research was highlighted by the Center for Transportation Studies.

JIAQI LI, BILL ARNOLD,  and  RAYMOND HOZALSKI  published a paper on N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) precursors in Minnesota rivers. “Animal Feedlots and Domestic Wastewater Discharges are Likely Sources of N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) Precursors in Midwestern Watersheds,” Environmental Science and Technology (January 2024) doi: 10.1021/acs. est.3c09251

ALIREZA KHANI  contributed to MnDOT research on Optimizing Charging Infrastructure for Electric Trucks. Electric options for medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks (e-trucks) are still largely in development. These trucks account for a substantial percentage of transportation greenhouse gas emissions. They have greater power needs and different charging needs than personal EVs. Proactively planning for e-truck charging stations will support MnDOT in helping to achieve the state’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. This research was featured in the webinar “Electrification of the Freight System in Minnesota,” hosted by the University of Minnesota’s Center for Transportation Studies. A recording of the event is now available online.

MICHAEL LEVIN  has developed a unique course for CEGE students on Air Transportation Systems. It is the only class at UMN studying air transportation systems from an infrastructure design and management perspective. Spring 2024 saw the third offering of this course, which is offered for juniors, seniors, and graduate students.

Research Professor  SOFIA (SONIA) MOGILEVSKAYA  has been developing international connections. She visited the University of Seville, Spain, November 13–26, 2023, where she taught a short course titled “Fundamentals of Homogenization in Composites.” She also met with the graduate students to discuss collaborative research with Prof. Vladislav Mantic, from the Group of Continuum Mechanics and Structural Analysis at the University of Seville. Her visit was a part of planned activities within the DIAGONAL Consortium funded by the European Commission. CEGE UMN is a partner organization within DIAGONAL, represented by CEGE professors Mogilevskaya and Joseph Labuz. Mantic will visit CEGE summer 2024 to follow up on research developments and discuss plans for future collaboration and organization of short-term exchange visits for the graduate students from each institution. 

DAVID NEWCOMB  passed away in March. He was a professor in CEGE from 1989–99 in the area of pavement engineering. Newcomb led the research program on asphalt materials characterization. He was the technical director of Mn/ROAD pavement research facility, and he started an enduring collaboration with MnDOT that continues today. In 2000, he moved from Minnesota to become vice-president for Research and Technology at the National Asphalt Pavement Association. Later he moved to his native Texas, where he was appointed to the division head of Materials and Pavement at the Texas A&M Transportation Institute, a position from which he recently retired. He will be greatly missed.

PAIGE NOVAK  won Minnesota ASCE’s 2023 Distinguished Engineer of the Year Award for her contributions to society through her engineering achievements and professional experiences.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) announced ten inaugural (NSF) Regional Innovation Engines awards, with a potential $1.6 billion investment nationally over the next decade. Great Lakes ReNEW is led by the Chicago-based water innovation hub,  Current,  and includes a team from the University of Minnesota, including PAIGE NOVAK. Current will receive $15 mil for the first two years, and up to $160 million over ten years to develop and grow a water-focused innovation engine in the Great Lakes region. The project’s ambitious plan is to create a decarbonized circular “blue economy” to leverage the region’s extraordinary water resources to transform the upper Midwest—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Brewing one pint of beer generates seven pints of wastewater, on average. So what can you do with that wastewater?  PAIGE NOVAK  and her team are exploring the possibilities of capturing pollutants in wastewater and using bacteria to transform them into energy.

BOYA XIONG  has been selected as a recipient of the 2024 40 Under 40 Recognition Program by the American Academy of Environmental Engineers and Scientists. The award was presented at the 2024 AAEES Awards Ceremony, April 11, 2024, at the historic Howard University in Washington, D.C. 

JUDY Q. YANG  received a McKnight Land-Grant Professorship Award. This two-year award recognizes promising assistant professors and is intended to advance the careers of individuals who have the potential to make significant contributions to their departments and their scholarly fields. 

Professor Emeritus CHARLES FAIRHURST , his son CHARLES EDWARD FAIRHURST , and his daughter MARGARET FAIRHURST DURENBERGER were on campus recently to present Department Head Paige Novak with a check for $25,000 for the Charles Fairhurst Fellowship in Earth Resources Engineering in support of graduate students studying geomechanics. The life of Charles Fairhurst through a discussion with his children is featured on the Engineering and Technology History Wiki at https://ethw.org/Oral-History:Charles_Fairhurst#00:00:14_INTRODUCTION

Related news releases

• Matthew J. Huber Student Award
• Catherine French, NAE
• Climate Change for Engineers
• Focused on the Road Ahead
• Randal Barnes receives Horace T Morace Award
• Future undergraduate students
• Future transfer students
• Future graduate students
• Future international students
• Diversity and Inclusion Opportunities
• Learn abroad
• Living Learning Communities
• Mentor programs
• Programs for women
• Student groups
• Visit, Apply & Next Steps
• Information for current students
• Departments and majors overview
• Departments
• Undergraduate majors
• Graduate programs
• Integrated Degree Programs
• Additional degree-granting programs
• Online learning
• Academic Advising overview
• Academic Advising FAQ
• Academic Advising Blog
• Appointments and drop-ins
• Academic support
• Commencement
• Four-year plans
• Honors advising
• Policies, procedures, and forms
• Career Services overview
• Resumes and cover letters
• Jobs and internships
• Interviews and job offers
• CSE Career Fair
• Major and career exploration
• Graduate school
• Collegiate Life overview
• Scholarships
• Diversity & Inclusivity Alliance
• Anderson Student Innovation Labs
• Information for alumni
• Get engaged with CSE
• Upcoming events
• CSE Alumni Society Board
• Alumni volunteer interest form
• Golden Medallion Society Reunion
• 50-Year Reunion
• Alumni honors and awards
• Outstanding Achievement
• Alumni Service
• Distinguished Leadership
• Honorary Doctorate Degrees
• Nobel Laureates
• Alumni resources
• Alumni career resources
• Alumni news outlets
• CSE branded clothing
• International alumni resources
• Inventing Tomorrow magazine
• Update your info
• CSE giving overview
• Why give to CSE?
• College priorities
• Give online now
• External relations
• Giving priorities
• CSE Dean's Club
• Donor stories
• Impact of giving
• Ways to give to CSE
• Matching gifts
• CSE directories
• Invest in your company and the future
• Recruit our students
• Connect with researchers
• K-12 initiatives
• Diversity initiatives
• Research news
• Give to CSE
• CSE priorities
• Corporate relations
• Information for faculty and staff
• Administrative offices overview
• Office of the Dean
• Academic affairs
• Finance and Operations
• Communications
• Human resources
• Undergraduate programs and student services
• CSE Committees
• CSE policies overview
• Academic policies
• Faculty hiring and tenure policies
• Finance policies and information
• Graduate education policies
• Human resources policies
• Research policies
• Research overview
• Research centers and facilities
• Research proposal submission process
• Research safety
• Award-winning CSE faculty
• National academies
• University awards
• Honorary professorships
• Collegiate awards
• Other CSE honors and awards
• Staff awards
• Performance Management Process
• Work. With Flexibility in CSE
• K-12 outreach overview
• Summer camps
• Outreach events
• Enrichment programs
• Field trips and tours
• CSE K-12 Virtual Classroom Resources
• Educator development
• Sponsor an event