Extenuating Circumstances and Submission Extension Regulations


Policy Statement

The School is committed to supporting students facing unforeseen challenges that impact their academic performance. Our Extenuating Circumstances Policy provides a fair process for applying for accommodations due to illness, family emergencies, or personal difficulties. Students can request extensions or deferred assessments via the Automated Governance System (AGS). This policy ensures equitable opportunities while upholding academic integrity.

Principles

  • Compassion: Approaching each case with empathy and understanding the personal challenges students face.
  • Equity: Ensuring all students are treated fairly and consistently, regardless of the nature of their circumstances.
  • Confidentiality: Protecting the privacy and sensitive information of students throughout the process.
  • Accessibility: Making the process and support available to all students, with clear guidelines on how to present their case.
  • Fairness: Assessing each application impartially and without prejudice.
  • Support: Providing appropriate resources and assistance to students navigating through the extenuating circumstances process.
  • Transparency: Offering clarity on the processes, options, and potential outcomes to students.
  • Flexibility: Adapting to the diverse and unique situations of each student’s extenuating circumstances.
  • Proportionality: Ensuring responses and accommodations are proportionate to the impact of the circumstances.
  • Responsiveness: Acting promptly and efficiently to student notifications of extenuating circumstances.
  • Restoration: Aiming to restore the student’s ability to perform to their full potential academically.
  • Continuous Review: Regularly reviewing the policy and procedures to reflect best practices and meet the evolving needs of the student body.

Regulatory Context

This Policy has been developed in line with the applicable laws, regulations, regulatory advice, and sector best practices, including the following:

Authority Name Url
Office for Students (OfS) Regulatory framework for higher education in England
This framework outlines OfS' primary aim to ensure positive outcomes for students, including access, success, and progress in higher education. It covers quality academic experience, progress into employment, and value for money.
UK Government Equality Act 2010
Equalities law to prohibit harassment and victimisation, and eliminate discrimination, including in the area of further and higher education, particularly with regards to specified personal characteristics.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) The Quality Code
This code represents a shared understanding of quality practice across the UK higher education sector, protecting public and student interests and championing the UK's reputation for quality.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Advice - Assessment and Marking
Guidance on assessment and marking for higher education providers .
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Advice - Enabling Student Achievement

Automatic Assessment Rule

Title
Rule
Automatic Assessment Rule

A student who registers for a module is deemed to have registered for its assessments unless they have formally withdrawn through the system. Missing an assessment will result in a mark of 0%, except in cases of intermission or extenuating circumstances. Starting an assessment, such as an exam or presentation, will be considered as having completed it, and the School's policies, including those on extenuating circumstances, will apply. Submitting a coursework late and the effect of extenuating circumstances is dealt with by the Assessment Regulations. 

This ensures that students are held accountable for their assessments unless they officially withdraw or have valid reasons like intermission or extenuating circumstances. It maintains fairness by treating the start of an assessment as a commitment to complete it, thus applying the School's policies consistently.

Application Procedures for Submission Extensions

Title
Rule
Before an Assessment is Due in or has Happened

Extenuating circumstances apply after an assessment deadline has passed. If a student anticipates missing a deadline due to extenuating circumstances, they should apply for a submission extension in advance. This applies also to students with Learning Support Plans (LSPs).

This rule ensures that requests for extensions are made before deadlines are missed, allowing for appropriate adjustments to be considered for those who anticipate difficulties.

Rule
Process

Students must apply for a submission extension via AGS and provide supporting evidence. If the assignment was set well before the deadline (e.g., two weeks or more), students may need to submit a draft or notes, or in some cases, a final draft that hasn’t been corrected. For brief extensions due to sudden illness, evidence is essential to ensure fairness. Supporting evidence must come from an independent, professional source and cover the relevant period. Acceptable documentation includes:

  • A medical certificate or letter from a doctor
  • Other certificates, such as a death certificate
  • A letter from a counsellor
  • Third-party confirmation, such as a police report

If circumstances are complex, students should seek advice from their Personal Academic Tutor, Module Leader, or Student Success Team. Extensions should be requested at least one working day before the deadline. Requests will only be granted with acceptable evidence; if evidence cannot be provided in advance of a deadline, an EC application must be submitted. Translating supporting documentation into English is the student's responsibility.

This rule ensures that requests for extensions are properly documented and submitted on time. It maintains fairness by requiring evidence and provides a clear process for handling requests, particularly in cases where supporting documentation may be challenging to obtain in advance.

Rule
Decisions

The module leader is responsible for granting extensions to deadlines for assessed work. When considering extension applications, the module leader must:

  • Ensure fairness, taking into account other students who have not requested extensions.
  • Record the extension details and reasons on the student’s AGS profile.

Extensions should generally:

  • Last no more than one or two weeks.
  • Reflect the time lost due to the unforeseen circumstance, not administrative deadlines.
  • Be set before feedback is given to avoid the student gaining an unfair advantage.
  • Allow time for the mark to be considered by the Module Examination Board to prevent issues with progression and reassessment.

If an extension would provide an unfair advantage or if the nature of the work makes rescheduling impractical, the request should be refused, and normal extenuating circumstances rules will apply.

For calculating penalties and late marks, the new deadline will be used, and the work will be marked as if it were submitted on time. The module leader must include details of extensions in their notes for the Module Examination Board and in their report.

If the student believes the extension did not sufficiently address their circumstances, they should submit an extenuating circumstances request, detailing how the extension was insufficient.

This rule ensures that extensions are granted fairly and recorded properly, maintaining equity among students. It outlines clear guidelines for the duration and conditions of extensions, and ensures that any issues with the quality of work due to the circumstances are addressed through the extenuating circumstances process.

Advice
Examples

Valid grounds for requesting an extension typically include:

  • Serious personal illness.
  • Serious accident, injury, or hospitalisation.
  • Death or serious illness of a family member or close friend.
  • Significant adverse personal or family circumstances or psychological issues.

Requests for extensions will generally not be granted for:

  • Commitments related to electioneering for a Students' Union position.
  • Poor time management or workload from other modules.
  • Minor illnesses.
  • Avoidable personal circumstances or commitments, such as holidays.
  • Paid employment commitments for full-time students.
  • Part-time students in full-time employment must prioritise School deadlines.

Exceptions may be considered if work commitments change unexpectedly due to circumstances beyond the student's control. In such cases, particularly for modules taken as professional development, the module leader should review applications sympathetically if supported by appropriate documentation, such as a letter from the student's line manager.

This rule outlines the types of circumstances generally accepted for extensions and those that are not considered valid, ensuring clarity on what constitutes acceptable grounds. It also provides guidance on handling exceptional cases with proper documentation.

Rule
Frequent Applications

If a student frequently applies for extensions due to outside commitments, the module leader and the student should assess whether the current mode of study is suitable. The module leader and/or Personal Academic Tutor may suggest changing the mode of study or taking a break until conditions are more favourable for study.

This rule ensures that students who regularly need extensions due to external commitments consider whether their current study arrangement is appropriate, potentially leading to adjustments that better support their academic progress.

Rule
Outcome Reviews

The processes for reviewing extenuating circumstances (above) also apply to the review of submission extensions.

This ensures consistency in handling both extenuating circumstances and extensions by applying the same procedures for fairness and clarity.

Approval by the Module Examination Board

Title
Rule
Consideration by the Module Exam Board (MEB)

The Module Examination Board (MEB) will make a final decision of all EC decisions communicated to it, such as:

  • Whether to maintain the original mark for late submissions, with or without classification.
  • Whether to approve a new deadline if an extension is granted.
  • Whether to offer a deferred assessment.

These decisions and their rationale will be recorded in the minutes. Students will be notified of the ECC's decisions within 5 working days of the MEB meeting. They will be informed of the reasons for any request denial but not of detailed discussions. The student will be provided with information on requesting an Outcome Review.

This procedure ensures that EC decisions are consistently applied and documented. It provides clear communication to students and maintains transparency while protecting the confidentiality of detailed discussions.

Rule
Defer Assessments

Deferred assessments replace all or some of the original assessments. If a deferred assessment is offered:

  • The AGS will show a defer mark.
  • The final module mark or grade will be based on the performance in the deferred assessment(s), using the original weighting.
  • If the original assessment cannot be replicated (e.g., a group project), a moderated substitute assessment of the same weighting may be provided, with approval from the Director of Education and discussion with the external examiner.
  • The first deferred assessment is considered a first attempt.

Please refer to the Module Results and Award Conferment Regulations for more details.

This ensures that deferred assessments are appropriately weighted and fair, maintaining the integrity of the assessment process while accommodating the need for alternative assessments when replication is not feasible.

Protocols for Adverse Weather Conditions

Title
Rule
Extenuating Circumstances

In inclement weather, students should make every reasonable effort to attend scheduled examinations, presentations, or submit work, without putting themselves at risk. If prevented from attending or arriving late, students must inform the School immediately and submit a self-certified extenuating circumstances request for severe weather disruption. Technical issues or less severe weather are covered by other School regulations.

This ensures students understand their responsibilities during adverse weather while providing a clear procedure for reporting and addressing severe weather disruptions, distinguishing it from technical or other issues.

Rule
School Closure for Inclement Weather

In the event of adverse weather causing the closure of a School site, notifications will be sent via the AGS. Cancelled examinations and presentations will be rescheduled either at the earliest opportunity or during a term/semester week (excluding holidays). Students must attend the rescheduled exams as they would the original dates. Work or assignments due on the closure day should be submitted via the AGS or on the next working day the site is open. If AGS submission was available but not used, an application for extenuating circumstances must be submitted explaining why.

This ensures that students are informed of site closures and rescheduled events while providing clear instructions for submitting work during closures and handling missed submissions.

Extenuating Circumstances Committee (ECC)

Title
Rule
Extenuating Circumstances Committee (ECC): Introduction

All valid self-certified and full EC applications are reviewed by the Extenuating Circumstances Committee (ECC).

The ECC makes decisions on EC requests before forwarding them to the Module Examinations Board for ratification. The ECC meets twice per semester: once after the first set of assessments and again after referrals, deferrals, and retakes.

Rule
EEC: Terms of Reference

The Extenuating Circumstances Committee (ECC) will consist of:

  • A Programme Leader as Chair
  • One member of academic staff
  • Member of the Student Success Team

The members are chosen from staff trained in extenuating circumstances (ECs). The Chair may invite additional participants for expert advice as needed. All ECC members must declare any conflicts of interest, and the Academic Board may appoint temporary members if required.

Rule
Process

Extenuating Circumstances (EC) applications may be considered through:

  • An Initial Assessment Process
  • A Full Committee Meeting Process

This approach ensures that applications are reviewed appropriately, either through a preliminary assessment or a detailed committee meeting, depending on the nature of the request.

Rule
A. Initial Assessment Process

The ECC will appoint a member as the initial assessor to review all EC requests.

  • If the initial assessor determines that the application is straightforward, they will make a decision without further ECC consideration. This decision will then be sent to the Module Examinations Board for ratification. Initial assessments must occur after the assessment periods and before the Module Examinations Board meetings.
  • If the initial assessor feels a full ECC review is necessary, they will refer the application to the next stage.

The process ensures efficient handling of clear-cut cases while allowing for comprehensive review of more complex applications. This timing aligns with the academic schedule and ensures decisions are made in a timely manner.

Rule
B. Full Committee Meeting Process

All non-straightforward EC cases must be reviewed at a full ECC meeting, which will take place after the assessment period but before the Module Examination Board meeting. The ECC will consider all applications forwarded by the initial assessor. The ECC may use additional methods to gather evidence and determine the impact of extenuating circumstances, including:

  • Viva voce examination
  • Additional assessment tasks to demonstrate module outcomes
  • Review of previous work
  • Standard assessment at the next available opportunity

This procedure ensures thorough evaluation of complex cases and timely decisions, maintaining fairness and academic standards. The additional methods help to gather comprehensive evidence and assess the impact of extenuating circumstances effectively.

Rule
Principles on Which Individual Assessor and Full Committee Decisions are Made

Both the initial assessor and the full ECC will base their decision on the following principles for accepting an EC application:

  • The request must be submitted according to the guidelines and deadlines.
  • Determine if self-certification is appropriate or if a Full EC request with supporting documentation is needed.
  • Assess the severity of the circumstances and whether they reasonably prevented or significantly impacted the student’s performance.
  • Evaluate the time period affected and the likelihood of performance impact.
  • Consider if the circumstances were foreseeable or avoidable by the student.
  • Ensure the application is backed by objective and authoritative evidence (e.g., from a qualified medical practitioner).

If a student seeks to defer part of an assessment, they must provide evidence to justify this split. The initial assessor and full ECC must ensure that the integrity of the assessment process is maintained and that no unfair advantage is gained.

These principles ensure that EC applications are assessed fairly and consistently, with a focus on the validity of claims and the impact on academic performance. They help maintain the integrity of the assessment process while accommodating genuine extenuating circumstances.

Rule
Decisions

The initial assessor or full ECC will decide whether an EC application is upheld or rejected, with possible outcomes including:

  • Maintaining the original mark for late submissions, with or without classification.
  • Setting a new deadline if an extension is granted.
  • Offering a deferred assessment if applicable.

Decisions on all EC applications will be inputted to the AGS so that the Module Examination Board is aware of the decision.

The Module Examination Board will then review and ratify the decision and determine actions.

This process ensures that EC applications are handled consistently and transparently and the Module Examination Board reviews decisions to ensure fairness and appropriate actions.

Outcome Review of Denied Extenuating Circumstances Claims

Title
Rule
Ground for an Outcome Review

If an EC application is refused, a student may request an outcome review via AGS on the following grounds:

  1. EC processes were not properly followed.
  2. The ECC did not fully consider the request or overlooked relevant information.
  3. The ECC failed to provide reasons for their decision.
  4. The student has new supporting documents that were not available at the time of the initial application.

This allows students to address potential procedural errors or provide additional information that may affect the outcome, ensuring a fair review process.

Rule
Limits

The limits on an outcome review are as follows:

  • A resubmission of the original application is not valid grounds for an outcome review.
  • An outcome review cannot be requested due to dissatisfaction with the design, curriculum, or delivery of the assessment; such issues should be addressed through the Student Complaints Resolution Procedure.

These limits ensure that outcome reviews focus on procedural and factual issues rather than subjective complaints about the assessment process.

Rule
Time Limits

Requests for Outcome Reviews must be submitted within 2 weeks of the outcome being sent to the student. Late requests will be rejected unless a valid reason for the delay is provided. Late requests will be kept on file for a further 2 weeks before being closed if no additional information is received.

This policy ensures timely processing of outcome reviews while allowing for consideration of late requests with valid reasons, maintaining fairness and efficiency.

Rule
Processing the Request

Applications for an Outcome Review will first be reviewed by the Director of Education. The Director will decide whether to:

  • Forward the request to the Chair of the ECC and Examination Board for a decision, or
  • Reject the application.

All decisions will be recorded on the AGS, and the Director of Education will communicate the outcome within 5 working days. Students may then use the School's complaints mechanism if dissatisfied.

This process ensures that requests are evaluated promptly and fairly, with clear documentation and communication. It also provides a structured path for students to appeal decisions if needed.

Advice
Exhaustion of Internal Review

If a student is not satisfied with the outcome review, no further internal review options are available. The student will be informed of their right to submit a complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA), including the time limit for doing so.

This ensures that students are aware of their external options for resolution and provides clear guidance on how to proceed if they remain dissatisfied.

Self-Certification Procedures

Title
Rule
When Can an Self-Certified Application be Made

A self-certified EC application can be made under exceptional circumstances that significantly impact the student but do not require medical intervention. This applies:

  • Only if the student was prevented from taking a time-limited assessment.
  • When obtaining evidence is difficult or unreasonable.

Supporting documentation is not needed for self-certified ECs, which can be used only once per semester. Applications must be submitted within 7 calendar days of the assessment date. After this deadline, a Full EC request must be made.

This process acknowledges the impact of certain situations while streamlining the application for cases where medical evidence is not applicable. It ensures timely submissions and maintains a fair system for all students.

Rule
Application via AGS

Self-certified EC requests must be submitted via AGS, which will automatically verify:

  • Submission within the 7-day deadline.
  • No other self-certified request has been made by the student in that semester.
  • The assessment task does not prohibit self-certified ECs.

If validated, the request will be forwarded to the EC Committee (ECC) for consideration.

This ensures that self-certified EC requests are processed promptly and fairly, adhering to deadlines and limitations. The automated verification helps maintain consistency and efficiency in handling applications.

Full Requests

Title
Rule
When Should a Full EC Application be Made

A full EC application requires students to upload supporting evidence to AGS. If supporting evidence is unavailable, students must explain why and provide any relevant information to substantiate their reasons.

Requiring supporting evidence ensures that EC applications are properly documented and assessed. If evidence cannot be provided, the requirement for an explanation maintains the integrity of the process while considering exceptional cases.

Rule
Examples of Supporting Evidence

Supporting evidence for a Full EC request must be from a professional source and cover the relevant time period. Examples include:

  • A medical certificate or letter from a doctor.
  • Official documents, such as a MATB1 maternity certificate.
  • A letter or form from a counsellor or School support services.
  • A supporting statement from a Personal Academic Tutor.
  • Third-party confirmation, such as a police report.

Professional evidence ensures the validity of the EC request and provides a clear basis for the application. This helps maintain fairness and consistency in the assessment of extenuating circumstances.

Rule
Student Responsibility

Students must ensure that their supporting evidence is appropriate and substantiates their request. If the request or evidence is unclear or inadequate, the student will not usually be given the benefit of the doubt, to ensure fairness to all students. For complex cases, students should consult their Personal Academic Tutor, module leader, or the Student Success Team for advice on the required evidence. Translation of evidence into English is the student's responsibility.

Clear and adequate supporting evidence is essential to fairly assess EC requests and maintain consistency. Seeking advice helps ensure that students provide the correct evidence, while requiring translation ensures that all documentation is accessible for review.

Rule
EC Committee

Full EC requests will be presented to the EC Committee (ECC) for review.

Listing requests for the ECC ensures that they are formally assessed and considered in accordance with the policy.

Process for Applying for Extenuating Circumstances

Title
Definition
Definition of Extenuating Circumstances (EC)

Extenuating circumstances (EC) refer to unforeseen issues beyond a student's control that hinder their ability to complete or perform well in an assessment. Students can apply for EC in cases of:

  • Absence from an assessment
  • Non-submission of assessed assignments
  • Late submission of assessed assignments
  • Unrepresentative performance in an assessment

The School's regulations address EC requests after the assessment. Requests for extensions or other adjustments before an assessment come under different frameworks, including learning support plans and requests for submisison extensions. 

This ensures that the School handles unforeseen challenges fairly, while maintaining clear boundaries between different types of requests and upholding academic integrity.

Advice
ECs: Examples

Valid extenuating circumstances (ECs) typically include:

  • Serious personal illness
  • Major accident, injury, or hospitalisation
  • Worsening of a long-term health condition
  • Death or serious illness of a family member or close friend
  • Unexpected and unavoidable caring responsibilities for a dependent
  • Significant adverse personal, family, or psychological issues

Circumstances not normally accepted for ECs, even with documentation, include:

  • Paid employment commitments for full-time students
  • Known ongoing issues (e.g., a long-term medical condition with existing adjustments)
  • Minor personal disruptions (e.g., car breakdown, missing transport, moving house, job interviews, holidays, minor illnesses)
  • Study-related issues (e.g., misunderstanding the timetable, equipment problems, poor time management)
  • Circumstances that seem foreseeable or preventable

This ensures that ECs are applied fairly, recognising genuine, significant issues while excluding non-critical or foreseeable problems that should not impact academic performance.

Rule
Application for Extenuating Circumstance: Automated Governance System (AGS)

Applications for extenuating circumstances (ECs) must be submitted via the AGS. Students can submit either a:

  • Self-certified EC application; or a
  • Full EC application.

This process ensures that all EC applications are handled consistently and efficiently through the AGS, allowing for appropriate review and consideration based on the nature of the request.

Rule
Time Period
  • Self-certified EC requests must be submitted within 7 calendar days after the assessment date.
  • Full EC applications can be submitted up to 2 weeks after the results are released by the Module Assessment Board, and must include a rationale if submitted after the results.

This timeline ensures that requests are made promptly, allowing for timely review and decision-making. Late full EC applications are considered on their merits, provided a valid reason for the delay is given.

Advice
Personal Academic Tutor (PAT) and Student Success Team

Students needing additional support with an EC application should contact their module leader, Personal Academic Tutor (PAT), or the Student Success Team

These contacts provide guidance and assistance to help students effectively manage their EC applications and ensure they receive appropriate support.

Rule
Confidentiality and Retention

All EC applications and records are confidential and will not be disclosed to unauthorised individuals. The School's data retention and privacy policies apply.

This ensures that sensitive information is protected and handled according to established data and privacy regulations.

Metrics and KPIs

The following metrics will be measured and regularly reviewed as key performance indicators for the School to ensure the effectiveness of this policy and associated operations.

Title
Adherence to Documentation Requirements
Measure the percentage of extension requests and extenuating circumstances applications that meet all documentation requirements upon first submission. Target: 90% of applications should be complete and meet documentation standards on the first submission.
This KPI ensures that students are submitting complete and well-documented requests, which speeds up processing and reduces the need for follow-up. It also reflects the clarity and effectiveness of the guidelines provided to students.
Review Outcome Timeliness
Measure the average time taken to review and decide on outcome review requests. Target: 90% of outcome reviews should be completed on time.
This KPI ensures that requests for outcome reviews are handled quickly, providing timely resolutions and maintaining student trust in the review process. Efficient review processes contribute to overall student satisfaction.
Student Satisfaction with Extension and EC Process
Conduct surveys to gauge student satisfaction with the extension and extenuating circumstances processes. Target: Achieve an 85% satisfaction rate from students regarding clarity, fairness, and efficiency.
Student feedback is crucial for assessing how well the policy meets their needs. A high satisfaction rate reflects that the process is perceived as fair and effective, leading to a positive student experience.
Timeliness of Extension Requests Processing
Measure the average time taken to process extension requests from submission to decision. Target: 95% of requests should be processed within 5 working days.
This KPI ensures that extension requests are handled promptly, which directly impacts student satisfaction by reducing wait times and anxiety. Timely processing also helps in maintaining academic schedules and fairness.
Policy: Extenuating Circumstances and Submission Extension Regulations