To assess students’ academic achievements and the extent to which the expected learning outcomes have been achieved, the University provides for the following types of assessment:

• – Continuous assessment – the systematic assessment of students’ knowledge in accordance with the approved course syllabus, conducted by the instructor during in-class and out-of-class activities through graded and/or ungraded assessment tasks throughout the academic period;
• – Final assessment (where applicable) – the assessment of students’ knowledge conducted upon completion of theoretical and/or practical training within a course, internship, non-formal education programme, as well as in other cases stipulated by the University’s internal regulations.

 

 

Forms and Formats of Continuous Assessment

Continuous assessment is carried out through assessment tasks completed by students to determine whether they have achieved the course learning outcomes.

Depending on the conditions under which it is conducted, continuous assessment may take the following forms:

• – an online assessment task completed using information and communication technologies;
• – an in-class assessment task completed under the direct supervision of an instructor or proctor.

Depending on the permitted use of learning materials, continuous assessment tasks are divided into:

• – closed-book assessments, completed without the use of any supporting materials, except those expressly permitted by the instructor;
• – open-book assessments, which allow students to use educational, regulatory and other materials within the limits established by the instructor.

The forms of continuous assessment are determined by the instructor, taking into account the course objectives and expected learning outcomes specified in the syllabus, and may include:

• – written assignments (for example, case studies, essays, draft articles and other assignments);
• – oral assignments (for example, oral questioning, presentations and other assignments);
• – projects;
• – presentations;
• – group assignments;
• – tests;
• – other forms of assessment.

 

 

Final Assessment (Examination)

An examination is conducted to comprehensively assess students’ achievement of the course learning outcomes.

An examination may be conducted in written, oral or combined form. The examination format is selected by the instructor in consultation with the Head of the Educational Programme, taking into account the nature of the course and its stated learning outcomes, and must allow for their objective assessment. The examination format shall be specified in the syllabus.

 

 

Final Attestation

• – For undergraduate students, final attestation consists of the preparation and defence of a graduation thesis (project) or the completion of a comprehensive examination. Final attestation programmes in the form of a comprehensive examination are approved by the Academic Quality Committees of the Schools.
• – For master’s students, final attestation consists of the preparation and defence of a master’s thesis (project).
• – For doctoral students, final attestation is conducted in accordance with the Rules for Awarding Degrees approved by the authorised body responsible for higher and postgraduate education.

Students’ academic achievements in all types of academic assignments are assessed using a letter grading system based on grade points. The conversion of grades into the traditional grading scale is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Letter grading system for recording students’ academic achievements, with conversion to the traditional grading scale

Letter grade	Grade point equivalent	Score (%)	Traditional grade	General description of assessment criteria
A	4.00	95–100	Excellent	The student demonstrates an excellent command of the subject. This grade indicates a high level of critical-thinking development.
A−	3.67	90–94	Excellent	The student demonstrates an excellent command of the subject. This grade indicates a high level of critical-thinking development.
B+	3.33	85–89	Good	The student demonstrates a very good level of academic performance. These grades indicate good critical-thinking skills.
B	3.00	80–84	Good	The student demonstrates a very good level of academic performance. These grades indicate good critical-thinking skills.
B−	2.67	75–79	Good	The student demonstrates a very good level of academic performance. These grades indicate good critical-thinking skills.
C+	2.33	70–74	Good	The student demonstrates a very good level of academic performance. These grades indicate good critical-thinking skills.
C	2.00	65–69	Satisfactory	The student demonstrates a low level of academic performance. These grades indicate that critical-thinking skills have been only partially developed.
C−	1.67	60–64	Satisfactory	The student demonstrates a low level of academic performance. These grades indicate that critical-thinking skills have been only partially developed.
D+	1.33	55–59	Satisfactory	The student demonstrates a low level of academic performance. These grades indicate that critical-thinking skills have been only partially developed.
D	1.00	50–54	Satisfactory	The student demonstrates a low level of academic performance. These grades indicate that critical-thinking skills have been only partially developed.
FX	0.50	25–49	Unsatisfactory	The student demonstrates a very low level of academic performance and must undertake further study before retaking the examination.
F	0.00	0–24	Unsatisfactory	The student demonstrates a very low level of academic performance. This grade indicates an extremely inadequate level of critical-thinking development.

 

 

The assessment criteria for continuous and final assessments shall be specified in the course syllabus.

Where a student receives an FX (“Unsatisfactory”) grade, they may retake the final assessment (examination), in accordance with the University’s academic calendar, without repeating the course or module, on no more than one occasion. Where a student receives an F (“Unsatisfactory”) grade, they must re-enrol in the course or module, complete the entire course or module, fulfil all assignments, obtain admission to the final assessment in accordance with the established procedure, and take the final assessment (examination). Re-enrolment in a course or module is available on a fee-paying basis only.

The Physical Education course is assessed on a pass/fail basis, with the award of academic credits. The grades are recorded as Pass or Fail and are not included in the GPA calculation.

The Physical Education course is compulsory for first- and second-year students.

All types of professional internships are graded and awarded academic credits. Grades received for all types of internships are included in the GPA calculation.

 

 

Assessment Procedure

Students’ academic achievements are assessed by evaluating their knowledge of the courses studied through graded assessment tasks conducted as part of continuous and final assessment, where applicable.

To ensure proper preparation for classes, the instructor shall upload and organise the course content in the LMS in accordance with the requirements established by the University’s internal regulations and/or the decisions of the School Academic Quality Committee.

The percentage weighting of continuous and final assessments shall be determined by the instructor and approved by the Academic Quality Committee upon submission of the syllabus.

The proportion of the final course grade awarded for assessment tasks completed without proctoring or outside the classroom, without direct supervision by the instructor, may not exceed 20% for undergraduate programmes. For master’s and doctoral programmes, this proportion may be adjusted where the instructor provides justification and the Head of the Educational Programme gives their approval. Any such adjustment shall be subject to approval by the School Academic Quality Committee.

Assessment results shall be published by the instructor in the LMS after the application of the grade distribution curve, except in cases provided for by the University’s Academic Policy and this Assessment Policy. Results shall be published within a reasonable period, but no later than 10 (ten) working days from the date of the relevant assessment task and/or examination.

Where objective circumstances exist, the deadlines specified in this clause may be changed with the approval of the Director (Dean) of the School and with mandatory notification of the academic staff and the School Academic Quality Committee.

The instructor is responsible for the timely and accurate entry of students’ grades into the LMS.

Published grades are final.

 

 

Grade Point Average (GPA) is the weighted average measure of a student’s academic achievement over a specified period within the selected programme. It is calculated as the sum of the products of the credits and the grade point equivalents of the final grades received for all types of academic work, divided by the total number of credits awarded for those types of work during the relevant period of study.

When calculating the GPA, the numerical grade point equivalent is multiplied by the number of credits assigned to the course. The results for all courses are then added together. To determine the cumulative GPA, the total number of grade points earned is divided by the total number of credits completed by the student.

The student’s transcript shall indicate the GPA for the academic period, the year of study and the entire period of study.

Certain courses are not classified as academic courses, and the credits awarded for them are not taken into account when determining whether a student may progress to the next year of study; nevertheless, completion of such courses is compulsory. The list of additional courses shall be specified in the curriculum.

Proctors shall be assigned at the examination venue to ensure compliance with the established examination procedures. The proctoring schedule and the list of responsible persons shall be approved by the Director (Dean) of the School and communicated to them in advance.

Proctors shall:

• – arrive at their assigned examination room no later than 30 (thirty) minutes before the examination begins;
• – inspect the examination room for prohibited or unauthorised items;
• – verify the identity of students before the examination begins;
• – remain at the examination venue throughout the examination to monitor students’ compliance with the principles of academic integrity and the established requirements for completing examination tasks;
• – document any violations of the established procedures and immediately notify the Deputy Director (Deputy Dean) on duty, the Director (Dean) of the School or a representative of the School’s administrative staff;
• – ensure the proper distribution and collection of examination materials.
• – If, during the identity verification process, proctors identify individuals who have not been admitted to the examination, they shall inform such individuals accordingly. If such an individual is identified during the examination, they shall be removed from the examination room immediately, and their examination paper shall be invalidated without being submitted for anonymisation or assessment.
• – Before the examination begins, students shall place all materials and items not permitted for use during the examination—including, but not limited to, mobile devices, smartwatches, data transmission devices, headphones, books, study materials, drafts and notes—in the location designated by the proctors.
• – As a general rule, the examination shall last 2 (two) clock hours. By a decision of the School Academic Quality Committee adopted on the basis of a reasoned submission from the Head of the Educational Programme, the examination duration may be extended, but shall not exceed 3 (three) clock hours. Such a decision must be communicated to the University Registrar’s Office no later than 5 (five) weeks before the end of the academic period.
• – During the examination, students shall comply with the principles of academic integrity and any other requirements established by the instructor and communicated to them in advance.
• – Students shall not be permitted to leave the examination room unless otherwise authorised by a decision of the Academic Quality Committee or the Director (Dean) of the School. In the event of a medical emergency, proctors shall immediately notify the Deputy Director (Deputy Dean), the Director (Dean) of the School or, in their absence, a representative of the School’s administrative staff, and shall accompany the student to the medical centre.
• – If a violation of academic integrity, examination-room procedures or examination rules is identified, or if any other circumstances arise that objectively prevent one or more students from continuing the examination, the proctors shall immediately notify the Deputy Director (Deputy Dean) and/or the Director (Dean) of the School or a representative of the School’s administrative staff. The proctors shall prepare a formal report in accordance with Appendix 1 to this Assessment Policy.
• – Students who complete the examination before the allotted time has elapsed shall leave the examination room immediately.
• – Students shall submit all examination materials and their completed examination papers before the examination ends. Submission of an examination paper after the allotted examination time has expired shall result in the paper being invalidated. A corresponding formal report shall be prepared in accordance with Appendix 1 to this Assessment Policy, with the involvement of the Deputy Director (Deputy Dean), the Director (Dean) or a representative of the School’s administrative staff.

Examinations may be carried out in online form using electronic proctoring system.

 

In case of continuous assessment each assignment session shall be recorded.

 

Online examinations are conducted in Canvas LMS, which may be integrated to proctoring app Proctorio LTI or another proctoring system.

 

Proctorio LTI is a software designed for automated remoted observation of student’s behavior during the exam.

 

Proctoring system shall observe the student’s behavior, actions on screen and environment around him/her depending on the settings, configured by instructor or designated faculty member. It may use the internet connection, web-camera and/or microphone.

 

Monitoring is carried out by the artificial intelligence system, which assign suspicion level depending on settings configured by the instructor or faculty member. All recorded video materials are stored and may be checked by the examiner.

 

Suspicion level is the percentage indicator of a frame, which is considered as a suspicious, abnormal or violating behavior based on the machine learning analysis.

 

The Examiner may send the report to corresponding Committee to consider the violation of Academic Integrity principles.

 

During online examinations students are prohibited to:

• – leave the recorded screen area or room;
• – interact with another person in a verbal, nonverbal or electronic communication;
• – send examination materials by any means;
• – use different software or apps except those permitted by the exam requirements;
• – open additional browser tabs;
• – use searching systems and go to websites, except those links attached to the examination assignment;
• – download or send examination tasks or materials by any means with the exception of prescribed exam rules;
• – copy and paste text fragments from examination materials or other sources;
• – use materials, except those attached to examination task, and devices of information and data transfer except the one on which the examination is carried out;
• – interrupt visual recording and examination in general.

 

During the exam students are not recommended to turn away from recording area for a longer duration, allow excessive and unreasonable mimic activity. Provider of proctoring system is responsible for personal data and video records privacy.

 

Only Examiner and assigned faculty members are allowed to have access to video recordings. Distribution of videos and personal data by any means is prohibited.

A review of continuous assessment results (an appeal) may be requested only in respect of graded assessment tasks and the written test included in the Reading & Preparation group of assignments conducted during the academic period for the relevant course.

If a student disagrees with a continuous assessment result, they shall submit a reasoned application for a review of the result (an appeal), addressed to the Director (Dean) of the School, through the Smart MNU mobile application within 3 (three) working days after the result is published in the LMS.

A duly submitted application shall be reviewed within 15 (fifteen) working days from the date of its registration in the University’s electronic document management system. The review period may be extended by no more than 1 (one) calendar month, of which the student must be notified.

In an application for a review of continuous assessment results (an appeal), the student shall specify:

• – their surname, first name and patronymic, if applicable;
• – their year of study;
• – their educational programme;
• – their contact details, including email address and telephone number;
• – the name of the course and the surname, first name and patronymic, if applicable, of the instructor;
• – the number of the graded assessment task, if applicable, or the written test, and the date on which it was conducted;
• – the date on which the disputed result was published in the LMS;
• – the specific circumstances indicating that the continuous assessment result was arbitrary or discriminatory.

If an application does not comply with the established requirements, the Director (Dean) of the School may decline to consider it and shall explain how the circumstances preventing the application from being accepted for consideration may be remedied.

The Director (Dean) of the School may also refer an application for a review of continuous assessment results (an appeal), in whole or in part, to the School Academic Quality Committee or the School Ethics Committee if, in addition to challenging the continuous assessment result, the application contains arguments that fall within the authority of the relevant committee.

If the application complies with the established requirements, the Director (Dean) of the School shall request from the instructor the materials necessary for a comprehensive review of the application, as well as the instructor’s comments or feedback if these have not previously been provided.

For the purpose of reviewing continuous assessment results (an appeal), the Director (Dean) of the School shall establish an Appeals Committee consisting of an odd number of members, including at least 3 (three) instructors from the School, and shall appoint its Chair. The Appeals Committee shall include instructors who possess the necessary academic and/or professional expertise in the relevant or a related field, enabling them to objectively assess the arguments presented in the application and the content of the work under review.

Review of Final Assessment Results (Appeal)

An application for a review of final assessment results (an appeal) shall be submitted to the Director (Dean) of the School through a designated mobile application, such as Smart MNU.

The Appeals Committee shall consider an application for a review of the results of a final assessment conducted in the form of an examination within 5 (five) working days after receiving all the relevant materials. In all other cases, the review period shall be determined by the Director (Dean) of the School.

 

 

Review of Final Attestation Results (Appeal)

A review of final attestation results (an appeal) may be requested in respect of the results of a comprehensive examination, the defence of a graduation thesis (project) and/or the defence of a master’s thesis (project).

If a student disagrees with their final attestation results, they may submit an application for a review of the results, addressed to the Director (Dean) of the School, within 3 (three) working days after the announcement of the final attestation results.

The student shall specify the following information in the application:

• – their surname, first name and patronymic, if applicable;
• – their educational programme;
• – the type of final attestation: comprehensive examination, defence of a graduation thesis (project), or defence of a master’s thesis (project);
• – the date and room number of the final attestation;
• – the specific circumstances indicating possible bias or a breach of the final attestation procedure.

The student may attach materials supporting their arguments to the application.

The Director (Dean) of the School shall verify whether the application complies with the established requirements within 1 (one) working day of its receipt.

If the application does not comply with the established requirements, the Director (Dean) of the School may decline to consider it and shall provide the reasons for doing so.

If the application complies with the established requirements, the Director (Dean) of the School shall establish an Appeals Committee consisting of an odd number of members, with no fewer than 5 (five) members, and shall appoint its Chair.

The Appeals Committee shall include instructors who possess the necessary academic and/or professional expertise in the relevant or a related field, enabling them to objectively assess the arguments presented in the application and the content of the work under review.

The Appeals Committee may not include members of the Final Attestation Committee who participated in the original assessment of the student’s graduation thesis (project) and/or master’s thesis (project).

Following its review, the Appeals Committee shall adopt one of the following decisions:

• – uphold the original result without amendment;
• – amend the final attestation result;
• – leave the application without consideration if the student submits a corresponding request;
• – refer the application to another body, department or official of the School or the University if indications of a violation falling within their authority are identified.

The decision adopted following the review of final attestation results (appeal) shall be approved by the Director (Dean) of the School, shall be final and shall not be subject to further appeal.

All materials and information relating to the final attestation and obtained during the review of its results (appeal) shall be confidential and may not be disclosed to third parties without the consent of the Director (Dean) of the School.

Review of Comprehensive Examination Results

The Appeals Committee shall review the student’s comprehensive examination materials, including the examination paper, assessment criteria and any other documents relevant to the consideration of the application.

Review of the Results of the Defence of a Graduation Thesis (Project) or Master’s Thesis (Project)

The Appeals Committee shall review the materials submitted as part of the defence of the graduation thesis (project) or master’s thesis (project), including the thesis or project itself, the assessment criteria and any other documents relevant to the consideration of the application.

The results of the defence may be reviewed where an audio or video recording of the Final Attestation Committee meeting and the student’s presentation, if applicable, are available.

If no audio or video recording of the Final Attestation Committee meeting is available, any doubts arising during the consideration of the student’s application shall be interpreted in the student’s favour.