An evaluation of use and impact of zero grades in assessment; are we being consistent, fair, and transparent?

Project leader(s):  Karen New Fiona Moorman

• Theme:  Access, Participation and Success
• Project faculties:  STEM
• Status:  Archived
• Date:  June 2021 to May 2025

Project context

This project investigated the application of late markers (L-markers) to tutor-marked assignments (TMAs) submitted late, i.e., after the official deadline or agreed extension. An L-marker is applied at the discretion of associate lecturers (ALs), within the eTMA system. By ticking a checkbox on the PT3 summary form, the student will receive feedback/feedforward comments related to their work, but any grade awarded for the TMA will be automatically over-ridden with a zero score. 

Prior to the project, it had become apparent that there was a lack of clarity over the extent to which L-markers were used within modules based in the School of Life, Health and Chemical Sciences (LHCS). Additionally, it had been recognised that there were inconsistencies with regards to when such markers should be applied to students’ work, and there were concerns as to whether we were being consistent, fair or transparent.

Project methodology

To evaluate the use of L-markers, in partnership with ACQ/Data Analytics, we extracted all assignments which had L-markers applied for all modules within LHCS, over the time period 2018-2021 (i.e. over the period immediately before the pandemic, during the pandemic, and in the immediate post-pandemic period).

To enable us to listen to AL perspectives relating to L-markers, we created an anonymous mixed-format JISC questionnaire, collecting both qualitative and quantitative information. To widen the discussion beyond one School, the questionnaire was distributed via email to a randomly-generated list of approximately 1000 ALs across the University.

To explore what happened to students after an L-marker had been applied, the internal management system, VOICE, was interrogated manually to determine number of assignments submitted/modules studied after application of the L-marker.

Implications of findings 

Our findings indicated that within LHCS, whilst L-markers were used rarely, there was a lack of consistency with regards to their application, and hence this raised significant concerns relating to fairness to students. Our findings suggested that Stage 1 students may be most impacted by receipt of a zero grade and less likely to continue their studies.   

Our findings also indicated that there was a lack of transparency for both ALs and students. Although student-facing guidance was available regarding potential penalties for TMAs submitted late within TMA/assessment policies, the guidance was unlikely to be easily found by time-poor students. There was no formal guidance for ALs regarding late marker application/best practice. 

Recommendations from the project

A review of the University late submission policy is recommended, to reflect on whether current strategies, where non-academic variables (leading to late submission) impact assessment scores, are fair to our students and in keeping with the needs of our diverse student base and in the context of retention concerns. 

We suggest that alternative mechanisms to deal with late submissions are available, which might include, for example:

• Fixed percentage deduction (in line with 10% penalties applied to late EMA submissions)
• Sliding scale deduction of marks, depending on ‘lateness’
• Capped score
• No penalty

It is also recommended that clear and transparent guidance is made available for students, associate lecturers, staff tutors and module teams. Staff development events should include opportunities to share best practice.

Related resources