Chapter 7: Thesis and examination matters

7.14 Examination Board for research master’s candidates

The Examination Board shall comprise the following:

• the convenor and chair of the Examination Board;
• the graduate coordinator (representing the head of the academic unit within which the candidate is located);
• the supervisor (with voting rights);
• a fourth panel member appointed by the convenor. In the case of multi-department faculties, this member must be from outside the candidate’s department/school, and in single-department faculties he/she must be from the faculty but from a different sub-disciplinary area to that of the supervisor and candidate.

The convenor will be the associate dean (graduate studies/research degrees) or their nominee, for example a member of the relevant faculty committee. In the case where the convenor is from the same academic unit as the candidate, a senior academic from outside the academic unit must be nominated.

The fourth panel member is appointed in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest and to maintain the standards and quality assurance of the examination.

The Examination Board shall have several tasks:

• to determine a general outcome for the thesis;
• to determine a grade and numerical mark for the thesis;
• to function as an advisory panel where necessary and advise on any matter relating to a candidate’s examination or assessment.

The role of the Examination Board is similar to that of the undergraduate Board of Examiners, in that it determines grades and numerical marks.

7.14.1 Pass

The work is to be passed without amendment.

7.14.2 Amendments

Candidates and academic units are advised if amendments are required, and requested to collect all the thesis copies from the Monash University Institute of Graduate Research Office. Guidelines for the insertion of changes into copies of the thesis are sent to candidates and the academic unit. Amendments must be made to all available copies of the thesis. When the amended copies are received by the faculty, together with the form certifying that amendments have been completed to the satisfaction of the head of the academic unit, the award of degree may normally proceed.

Note: Where an examiner or examiners recommend the thesis be passed or passed subject to amendments, the mark they recommend must be 60% or above. In the case of 'pass' or 'amendments' the final thesis grade is normally determined by the Graduate Research Committee by averaging the two marks, without the Examination Board being convened.

7.14.3 Revision and resubmission

A recommendation that the thesis be revised and resubmitted must not be accompanied by a mark. A mark will be determined once the thesis has been resubmitted and re-examined.

Where both examiners recommend revision and resubmission, the normal recommendation of the Examination Board shall be that the thesis be revised and resubmitted to both examiners. These examiners will be asked to grade the resubmitted thesis at 60% or above if their recommendation is that the thesis be passed, or passed subject to amendments.

Where one examiner recommends a pass (or pass with amendments), the Examination Board may recommend either that the thesis is:

 

• revised and resubmitted to the dissenting examiner, who shall also be invited to make a final recommendation in relation to the revised work and to grade the work, should their recommendation now be pass or pass subject to amendments; or
• submitted to an adjudicator who shall review the thesis, the examiners’ (de-identified) reports and the candidate’s rejoinder and be invited to recommend a general assessment and numerical grade.

Where the adjudicator endorses the assessment of the original assenting examiner, the thesis shall be passed and the final numerical grade determined by the common grade and mark recommended by both, or by averaging the two marks.

Example:

Examiner A: 84%
Examiner B: no mark due to revision and resubmission recommendation
Adjudicator: 70%
Average of examiner A and adjudicator: 77% H2A

Example:

Examiner A: 85%
Examiner B: no mark
Adjudicator: 85%
Agreed mark by examiner A and adjudicator: 85% H1
Where the adjudicator also recommends revision and resubmission, the candidate will be invited to revise and resubmit the work to either the dissenting examiner and the (dissenting) adjudicator, who shall each recommend a final outcome and a mark, where his/her recommendation is pass or pass subject to amendments.
A final grade and mark for the thesis will then be delivered by the Examination Board.

7.14.4 Fail

Where both examiners recommend that the thesis be failed, the Examination Board shall deem the thesis to have failed.
Where one examiner only recommends that the thesis be failed and the other recommends that the thesis be passed (or be passed with amendments), the Examination Board will normally recommend the appointment of an adjudicator, who is external to the University, and a final grade shall be determined as above.

Where one examiner only recommends that the thesis be failed and the other recommends that the thesis may be revised and resubmitted, the Examination Board will again appoint an adjudicator, as above.

7.14.5 Other instances where an adjudicator may be appointed

An adjudicator must be appointed in cases where the examiners’ marks differ markedly (i.e. by 20 points or more), e.g. examiner A awards a mark of 70% (H2A) and examiner B awards 90% (H1), as the average of these marks (80%) is likely to result in a thesis mark which fails to reflect the view of either examiner.

Where, however, the examiners’ marks differ by less than 20 points but the marks awarded are two grades apart, e.g. examiner A awards a mark of 62% (H2B) and examiner B awards 80% (H1), the Examination Board may exercise its discretion as to whether an adjudicator will be appointed or not.

In such cases, the common mark adopted by the adjudicator and the examiners with which he/she agrees shall be the final grade, or where the adjudicator agrees with neither of the examiners, an average of the three marks will assist the Examination Board in reaching a final determination.

Example:

Examiner A: 85%
Examiner B: 65%
Adjudicator: 85%
Grade awarded: 85% H1 

Example:

Examiner A: 85%
Examiner B: 65%
Adjudicator: 75%
Grade awarded: 75% H2A

7.14.6 Material submitted to the adjudicator

It is considered appropriate, where a thesis is to be submitted for adjudication, that the candidate is invited to submit a written defence of the thesis in response to the criticisms and comments of the dissenting examiner. The candidate’s defence will then be sent to the adjudicator together with the thesis and the de-identified examiners’ reports.

Both the candidate and the examiners are informed that an adjudicator has been appointed and the candidate is informed of the adjudicator’s name under the same conditions of confidentiality as applied to the appointment of examiners. However, the identity of the original examiners and the adjudicator are not revealed to each other.

The Graduate Research Committee considers an appropriate order in which an adjudicator might proceed with the task is first to read the thesis, next assess the examination reports, and finally consider the candidate’s thesis defence.

7.14.7 Role of the adjudicator

In summary, the adjudicator’s role may be defined as follows:

An adjudicator is not an additional examiner, but a judge requested to pronounce on the relative soundness, correctness and appropriateness of the initial two examiners’ recommendations. To this end, the adjudicator should offer an opinion on whether the examiners were competent and fair. For example, the adjudicator should assess whether the examiners:

• have fully grasped the substance of the candidate’s thesis; 
• have erred in their judgement of the thesis;
• have reviewed the thesis at a level appropriate to that of a research master’s candidate;
• have awarded a grade and numerical mark appropriate to the classification guidelines/descriptors.

An adjudicator is then asked to provide reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with examiners. It should be reiterated that in making an assessment on the appropriateness of the two examiners’ reports, the adjudicator is not being asked to set additional new requirements for the candidate. The adjudicator will also be asked to complete the adjudicator’s form, including the recommendation of a mark and grade.

7.14.8 Final determination of overall grade and numerical mark

The Examination Board has the power to moderate marks by no more than two percentage points where the overall grade is close to the cut-off for a higher honours grade.

Having received the adjudicator’s advice, the Examination Board shall determine a final grade, as above.

The Graduate Research Committee must ultimately determine whether a candidate has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the degree after considering the:

• results of the examination or assessment of any coursework units;
• results of any oral examination;
• reports of the thesis examiners; and
• report of any Examination Board.

print version