Education Policy and Procedure

Important education policy and procedure

University-wide policies support students’ academic development and ensure consistent assessment practices across Monash. All Monash policies are available in the Policy Bank, a central repository of Monash policies and procedures organised in one place. In rare cases, Monash University Malaysia may also have its own policies and procedures, which will be updated here.

Policy and procedure documents can be difficult to navigate, so to help you, here’s a summary of key policies relevant to your teaching. You may also ask Education Excellence if anything is still unclear.

Feedback and assessment scheduling View

Summary	Policy Statement and Source
No scheduled assessments on Fridays. Assignments can be due for submission on Fridays.	Assessments in units taught at Monash University Malaysia, must not be scheduled on a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday recognised in Malaysia. This includes in-class tests and quizzes, assessed presentations and performances, and all scheduled timed assessments (including deferred assessments, supplementary assessments and rescheduled deferred assessments). Assignments can be due for submission on Fridays. See 3.3 of Assessment Regime Procedure Scheduled final assessments for units taught at Monash University Malaysia, must not be scheduled on a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday recognised in Malaysia. This includes deferred assessments, supplementary assessments and rescheduled deferred assessments. See 3.2.1 of Scheduled Final Assessments Procedure
Assessment feedback should be provided before Week 6.	The chief examiner must ensure that students are provided with feedback early in the teaching period (before the mid-point) that can support their further learning. See 3.10 of Marking and Feedback Procedure
Assessments must be marked and returned to students within 10 working days.	Students must be provided with effective feedback on their assessment, except for scheduled final assessments, within 10 working days of the assessment submission deadline or, if an extension is granted, within 10 working days of the extended date. See 3.9 of Marking and Feedback Procedure

Assessment design View

Summary	Policy Statement and Source
All units must have at least two major assessment tasks, each worth more than 20% but less than 60%. Thesis or project-based units are an exception.	A unit’s assessment regime must: include at least two major assessment tasks (i.e. tasks worth at least 20 per cent of the total unit assessment) and no taskworth more than 60 per cent of the total unit assessment, except in zero credit point units or as outlined in section 1.5. See 1.4 of Assessment Regime Procedure
No marks for attendance and participation, unless it is a requirement for an external accreditation or a condition of maintaining a student visa. See Discussion and Recommendations on Participation.	The chief examiner can determine if particular assessment tasks require student attendance. An attendance requirement will not form part of the assessment regime unless it is required for external accreditation and/or regulatory requirements. Attendance may be a condition of maintaining a student visa in some locations. See 1.6, 1.6.1 and 1.6.2 of Assessment Regime Procedure
New assessment tasks must be reviewed for compliance.	Assessment tasks that have been developed by an individual academic staff member must be scrutinised by one or more members of the teaching team (or an appropriately qualified academic staff member if the chief examiner is the only teaching staff member for the unit) to validate compliance with the requirements of this procedure and the Assessment and Academic Integrity Policy. See 2.7 of Assessment Regime Procedure
Hurdles are not regular practice at Monash and must be a requirement of a professional accrediting body or be approved by the Dean.	Hurdles can only be used if they are necessary to demonstrate the achievement of specific unit learning outcomes or a required professional competency. Where a unit has hurdles: they are part of the assessment regime for a unit and are approved by the dean (or delegate) of the unit-teaching faculty; and the Handbook must specify the hurdle requirements and the consequence[s] of not meeting hurdles. See 4.2 and 4.3 of Assessment Regime Procedure

Marking and results management View

Summary	Policy Statement and Source
Fail grades should be double-marked.	All major assessment tasks, including scheduled final assessments, with a fail grade must be double-marked by the teaching faculty before the result is finalised. See 4.1 of Marking and Feedback Procedure
Educators are not required to remark assessments because students disagree with the mark or feedback received.	Students can request a correction of their assessment mark due to an error, e.g. if an incorrect late penalty has been applied or due to a miscalculation. A student cannot request a correction of their mark on the basis that they do not agree with the mark, or that they perceive the feedback received to be inadequate. See 5.2 of Marking and Feedback Procedure
No scaling marks to achieve an ideal grade distribution. This includes applying a cap for a particular grade (i.e. no limit for HDs or Ds).	Scaling of marks to achieve an ideal grade distribution is not permitted and is inconsistent with the criterion-referenced assessment approach of Monash University. See 4.5 of Marking and Feedback Procedure

Academic integrity View

Summary	Policy Statement and Source
Suspected breaches of academic integrity are managed through the University’s academic integrity portal.	Chief examiners must ensure that: students are educated in appropriate academic practice specific to the discipline; reports of suspected breaches are managed through the University’s academic integrity portal. When the suspected breach is in relation to any assessment task, including a scheduled final assessment, the staff member must stop marking the assessment (if applicable) and immediately report the breach to the chief examiner or nominee via the online form, including any evidence relating to the suspected breach. See 2.7 and 5.1.1 of Student Academic Integrity Procedure
It is the responsibility of academic staff to educate students about academic integrity and assessment conditions including: restrictions on the use of AI (if any) how to acknowledge the use of AI	Where use of generative artificial intelligence tools is not allowed in an assessment task, the chief examiner will specify the types of generative artificial intelligence tools (e.g. text-generating, image-generating, translators) that cannot be used. Such restrictions are recorded in the assessment documentation in the learning management system. See 1.17.2 of Assessment and Academic Integrity Policy Chief examiners must ensure that students enrolled in the unit are educated about the University’s academic integrity standards and requirements that apply to each unit or assessment task, including the University’s resources on responsible and ethical use of generative artificial intelligence tools. See also section 2.7 of the Student Academic Integrity Procedure. See 2.8.7 of Assessment Regime Procedure Chief examiners must ensure that: students are educated about the responsible and ethical use of generative artificial intelligence tools and how such tools should be acknowledged if they are used See 2.7 of Student Academic Integrity Procedure
If a chief examiner restricts the use of generative AI in assessment, this decision must be based on educational reasoning, the assessment task and its function in generating particular evidence of student learning.	The chief examiner must determine where and how generative artificial intelligence tools can be used in a unit, an assessment task, or part of an assessment task. Where the chief examiner specifies that generative artificial intelligence is not allowed, the decision should be made based oneducational reasoning, the assessment task and its function in generating particular evidence of student learning. The reason must be clearly stated in the required section in the learning management system and published before the start of the teaching period or no later than four weeks before the assessment task details are made available to students. See 1.7 and 1.7.1 of Assessment Regime Procedure
Any restrictions on the use of AI in assessment must be clearly stated in Moodle prior to the teaching period. Watch a video on how to specify conditions in Moodle or read more on this topic.	Where the use of generative artificial intelligence tools is not allowed in an assessment task, the chief examiner will specify the types of generative artificial intelligence tools (e.g. text-generating, image-generating, translators) that cannot be used. Such restrictions are recorded in the assessment documentation in the learning management system. See 1.17.2 of Assessment and Academic Integrity Policy Table 2: Communication methods and timeframes of assessment requirements See 7.1 of Assessment Regime Procedure
Students must acknowledge the use of AI in assessment.	When generative artificial intelligence is used by students as part of the assessment, it is expected to be used with honesty and in a manner that is responsible and ethical. If students use generative artificial intelligence to create work submitted for assessment, it must always be acknowledged. See 1.17 and 1.17.1 of Assessment and Academic Integrity Policy Students are responsible for demonstrating appropriate academic practice. Specifically, students must: appropriately acknowledge the use of generative artificial intelligence tools See 2.15 of Student Academic Integrity Procedure
If students fail to acknowledge the use of AI or use AI where the Chief Examiner has specified in Moodle that it cannot be used, this constitutes a breach of academic integrity.	Students must not breach the conditions for assessments set by chief examiners in the learning management system or within the assessment instructions. Conditions may include but are not limited to: not using generative artificial intelligence tools; or acknowledging the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in the creation of work. See 4.7 of Student Academic Integrity Procedure

Policy Bank

Read about education policies and procedures