1
KING’S COLLEGE LONDON
ACADEMIC REGULATIONS
2023/24
2
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 1: ADMISSIONS ............................................................................................................. 6
General Entry Requirements ................................................................................................. 6
Admission with Credit Transfer or Advanced Standing ........................................................... 8
CHAPTER 2: REGISTRATION AND ATTENDANCE ........................................................................... 11
Enrolment .......................................................................................................................... 11
Minimum and Maximum Periods and Interruption of Study ................................................. 11
Concurrent Registration ...................................................................................................... 13
Transfer of Registration and Registration for the same Qualification ................................... 13
Attendance ......................................................................................................................... 14
CHAPTER 3: QUALIFICATION AND COURSE FRAMEWORK ............................................................ 15
Awards of King’s College London ......................................................................................... 15
Programme Specifications .................................................................................................. 21
Modules ............................................................................................................................. 22
CHAPTER 4: ASSESSMENT FOR TAUGHT PROGRAMMES .............................................................. 24
General .............................................................................................................................. 24
Scheduling .......................................................................................................................... 24
Conduct .............................................................................................................................. 25
Examiners .......................................................................................................................... 25
Alternative Assessment ....................................................................................................... 25
Mitigating Circumstances ................................................................................................... 26
Late Submission of Coursework ........................................................................................... 26
Marking and Pass Marks..................................................................................................... 27
Feedback ............................................................................................................................ 28
Reassessment ..................................................................................................................... 29
Intellectual Property and Access to Examination Scripts ....................................................... 32
CHAPTER 5: PROGRESSION AND AWARD FOR TAUGHT PROGRAMMES ....................................... 33
All awards .......................................................................................................................... 33
Programmes with a Semester/Year abroad or in industry ................................................... 33
Compensated Credit (undergraduate and integrated masters, year one) .............................. 33
Condonement (all pre-undergraduate programmes, undergraduate programmes in year 2
onwards; all postgraduate taught programmes) ................................................................. 34
Additional Credit ................................................................................................................ 34
Substitute Modules (all programmes excluding pre-undergraduate) .................................... 35
Credit Tables for Undergraduate and Integrated Masters .................................................... 36
Conferment ........................................................................................................................ 45
3
Classification of Awards ...................................................................................................... 45
General Award Rules .......................................................................................................... 46
Credit Transfer and Mark Translation .................................................................................. 47
Award Algorithm ................................................................................................................ 48
Aegrotat Awards ................................................................................................................ 52
Exit Awards ........................................................................................................................ 53
Posthumous Awards ........................................................................................................... 54
Certificates and Transcripts ................................................................................................. 54
Revocation ......................................................................................................................... 54
CHAPTER 6: FRAMEWORK FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH AWARDS .......................................... 55
Research Degree Awards (programmes offered and criteria) ............................................... 55
Registration........................................................................................................................ 60
Minimum and maximum periods of registration .................................................................. 62
Collaborative research degrees and Off-campus study ......................................................... 63
Arrangements for off-campus study .................................................................................... 66
Working and teaching during a research degree .................................................................. 67
Supervision ......................................................................................................................... 68
Progression ........................................................................................................................ 71
Extending and exceeding .................................................................................................... 78
Interruption of study ........................................................................................................... 79
Examination entry requirements ......................................................................................... 80
Examinations ...................................................................................................................... 81
Examination Outcomes ....................................................................................................... 84
CHAPTER 7: ACADEMIC SUPPORT AND APPEALS ......................................................................... 96
Personalised Assessment Arrangements .............................................................................. 96
Mitigating Circumstances ................................................................................................... 96
Support for Study ................................................................................................................ 96
Academic Appeals for pre-undergraduate, undergraduate and postgraduate taught students
.......................................................................................................................................... 96
CHAPTER 8: CONCERNS, CONDUCT AND COMPLAINTS .............................................................. 102
Insufficient Academic Progress .......................................................................................... 102
Removal of a student from an external environment ......................................................... 104
Conduct ............................................................................................................................ 105
Fitness to Practise ............................................................................................................. 106
Emergency powers to exclude or suspend .......................................................................... 106
Suspension for late payment of tuition fees ....................................................................... 107
4
Complaints ....................................................................................................................... 107
Termination...................................................................................................................... 107
CHAPTER 9: GOVERNANCE ....................................................................................................... 109
Exceptions ........................................................................................................................ 109
Exemptions ....................................................................................................................... 109
Emergency Regulations ..................................................................................................... 110
Assessment Boards, External Examiners and Committee Procedures
GLOSSARY
5
INTRODUCTION
The King’s Academic Manual includes academic regulations, policies and procedures applicable to all
King’s College London taught and research students enrolled on a programme of study in 2023/24,
including programmes and modules delivered by King’s Online and King’s Foundations, free-standing
credit bearing modules and credit-bearing MOOCs. The regulations ensure the academic integrity of
the university and form the framework for students’ academic experience, including learning,
teaching and assessment.
Academic regulations and policies are part of the formal contract between the university and its
students. They apply to all members of the university, including all students, staff, and external
examiners. The Manual should be read in conjunction with individual programme specifications and
the Student Terms and Conditions.
Students are encouraged to familiarise themselves with relevant sections when they enrol and
consult the Regulations and Policies at appropriate intervals during their studies. Further guidance
and support for students can be found on Student Services Online.
Governance, Approval and Amendment
The academic regulations in force when students register will normally apply to them until
completion of their programme. In-year changes are avoided. If changes are necessary, these will be
communicated promptly on the Academic Manual webpages. Academic regulations for previous
years are available here.
A university officer may delegate powers under these regulations to another university officer,
providing that any person with delegated powers is in a position to act and be seen to act
impartially.
Academic policies and the regulations in the following chapters are subject to regular review.
Updated versions apply irrespective of the year of a student’s registration:
• Chapter 7: Academic Support and Appeals
• Chapter 8: Concerns, Conduct, and Complaints
Language used in King’s academic regulations and policies.
To ensure that King’s Academic Regulations are as clear and unambiguous as possible, the following
conventions are used:
Must
Indicates a regulation that will be adhered to in all circumstances. Deviations from such
regulations would only be granted by the Vice Principal (Education and Student Success) in
exceptional circumstances via the exemptions procedure. For example, “All
programmes must have an annually updated programme specification”.
Should
Indicates a regulation that will be adhered to unless sound pedagogical, professional or
practical reasons prevent this. For example, “A variety of assessment methods should be
used across a programme of study to test different knowledge and skills”.
May
Indicates where an action or regulation is allowed but not mandatory, and where there
might therefore be variations across programmes and modules. For example,
“Information may be provided in a number of formats including Student Handbooks,
KEATS and KCL webpages”.
6
CHAPTER 1: ADMISSIONS
This section outlines the requirements placed on students before their arrival at the College. To be
admitted onto a programme, applicants must meet both the general entrance requirements and the
specific requirements of an approved programme. They continue to apply to students once they are
registered at the university. This section includes the conditions that apply for enrolment on a
programme with recognition of previous learning, which includes enrolment with advanced
standing, transfer enrolment, and enrolment with recognition of prior learning.
General Entry Requirements
1.1.
To be admitted to the university students must:
a. satisfy the general admission requirements for the level of study and the entry
criteria for the relevant programme as outlined in the online prospectus;
b. be proficient in English and able to apply this in an academic environment.
Competency in English must be confirmed before registration with the exception
of some modules. Specific requirements for the relevant programme are outlined
on the online prospectus;
c. be aware of the standard of behaviour expected of applicants and the
consequences of not meeting this as outlined in the Applicant Misconduct Policy;
d. disclose a criminal record as outlined in the Criminal Record Disclosure Policy
(Student Admissions) and demonstrate a satisfactory Disclosure and Barring
Service (DBS) check, where applicable;
e. have passed an occupational health assessment, where required;
f. have an appropriate visa and have satisfied the requirements of UK Visa and
Immigration (UKVI), where applicable;
g. have satisfied any specific arrangements considered necessary, as detailed in the
offer letter, if the applicant is under 18 years of age on the official start date of
the programme;
h. comply with the enrolment procedure.
Admission requirements for pre-undergraduate and undergraduate programmes
1.2.
Applicant’s qualifications must satisfy the specific programme requirements outlined in
the online prospectus.
1.3.
Where applicable, applicants will also be required to complete an admissions test and
take part in an interview to meet the admissions requirements. These requirements are
outlined on the online prospectus.
Admission requirements for taught postgraduate programmes
1.4.
The minimum entrance requirements for registration on a taught postgraduate
programme are:
7
a. a Second-Class Honours degree of a UK university or equivalent overseas
qualification obtained after at least two years study; or
b. a registrable qualification appropriate to the programme awarded by a UK
university in Medicine or Dentistry, or equivalent overseas qualification
appropriate to the programme; or
c. a professional or other qualification obtained by a formal examination and
approved by the faculty in consultation with the Director of Students and
Education (or nominee).
1.5.
Applicants who do not meet the minimum entry requirements for the programme may be
admitted if:
a. they hold an alternative qualification of an equivalent or higher level or;
b. they have experience which satisfies the faculty that the applicant can follow and
complete the programme of study; or
c. they satisfy the faculty in any qualifying examination or other condition, including
a qualifying period of study, that the programme can be followed and completed.
In the event of disagreement, the Vice-Principal (Education and Student Success), or
nominee, will make the final decision.
Admission requirements for postgraduate research degree programmes
1.6.
The minimum entrance qualification for registration on a postgraduate research
programme is an Upper Second-Class Honours degree in a relevant subject, or an
equivalent overseas qualification obtained after at least three years of study. Any
additional requirements will be detailed in the online prospectus.
1.7.
To be eligible for registration for the MD(Res) degree, an applicant must have obtained
the MB BS degree or another registrable primary qualification in medicine from a higher
education institution and be eligible for full registration or hold limited registration with
the General Medical Council.
1.8.
Students who do not meet the minimum entrance requirements may be admitted if they
hold an alternative qualification of an equivalent or higher level in a relevant subject or
can prove relevant professional experience which satisfies the Associate-Dean for
Doctoral Studies in the faculty that the applicant can follow and complete the programme.
1.9.
It is the responsibility of the faculty to have transparent selection procedures in place in
order to accept students onto postgraduate research programmes. Following an initial
screening, selection will be by interview either face to face or for some international
students by another communication method as deemed appropriate by the faculty.
Offers for a place can then be made by the appropriate authority within the faculty and
via the offer letter from the Postgraduate Admissions Office.
8
Admission with Credit Transfer or Advanced Standing
General rules
1.10.
There is no general right of entry; the final decision rests with the admitting faculty. The
faculty may make admission conditional upon students undertaking preparatory or
supplementary studies, or particular modules in the programme. Any such conditions shall
be agreed by the faculty and the students before admission. For students on joint
programmes the relevant faculty or department should be consulted.
1.11.
For undergraduate and postgraduate taught programmes, credit granted cannot exceed
two thirds of the overall credit value of the programme.
1.12.
Credit earned cannot be used towards an award more than once except in cases where
students:
• are students registered on joint/dual degrees;
• are registered on programmes covered by articulation agreements; or
• have made a successful application to join the programme with recognition of
prior certified learning where the prior certified learning formed part of an
award.
1.13.
Except as given in (b) below, students will only be admitted to the start of a specific year
of study and will not be admitted at a point beyond the start of the final year of full-time
study or its part-time equivalent. Students entering the final year of a programme must
complete and pass the approved programme of study for that year.
a. In the case of undergraduate degree programmes, students entering the final
year of a programme must take modules worth 120 credits. For a level 6 award,
90 of these credits must be at level 6; for a level 7 award, 120 credits must be at
level 7;
b. Where students have successfully completed a Postgraduate Certificate or
Diploma and register for another postgraduate programme in the same subject,
the reduced programme of study must extend over a minimum of one third of
the normal period of full-time or part-time study prescribed for the programme
and the student must fulfil the minimum and maximum period of study
requirements. For a masters degree, the period of study and assessment
conducted under the direction of the university must include a dissertation or
report.
1.14.
Normally, credit for a completed award can only be used to seek advanced standing to an
award at a higher level. Credit from a complete award can be used towards another award
at the same level only if the following criteria are met:
• The award towards which the student is seeking credit is in a different subject,
vocational or professional area to their prior award; or
• The award is at master’s level and enables the student to advance their existing
subject, professional or vocational area in a new or specialist direction.
9
1.15.
To be eligible for an award, students admitted with credit and granted relevant waivers
must:
a. meet the prescribed criteria for the award;
b. be assessed at the final level of the award as outlined in the programme
specification; and
c. complete the remainder of the prescribed period of study at the College.
1.16.
The final classification of an award shall be based solely on the studies undertaken at the
College.
1.17.
The period between first registration on the previous programme and the date of the
award of the new King’s award should be no more than 10 years for the previous
programme’s credit to count towards the new award.
1.18.
Once admitted, students will be subject to the regulations and programme requirements
that are applicable to the cohort that they join.
Progression to higher awards
1.19.
Where students have completed a King’s College London programme of study and wish to
progress to the next level within two years, the previous award will be revoked and the
student may progress to the next level. Where the period between the previous award
and re-enrolment is greater than two years, the recognition of prior learning regulations
apply (regulation 1.22-1.30).
Exception to regulation 1.19: for programmes where students were originally awarded
with registration to practice, the original award will stand and enrolment with recognition
of prior learning (1.22-1.30) will apply.
Admission with advanced standing
1.20.
Where students have successfully completed an approved programme of study, they may
be enrolled at an appropriate point on an approved programme in a similar field. This
generally applies in cases where students have completed a lower-level award (e.g. UGDip
or PGDip) and subsequently wish to register for a related higher-level award (e.g. BSc or
MSc).
Admission with transfer enrolment
1.21.
If students have successfully completed part of an approved programme of study, they
may be enrolled at an appropriate point on an approved programme in a similar field. For
example, a student may have completed year one of an undergraduate programme and
may wish to transfer to year 2 of a similar programme. For students who wish to transfer
within the university or to another institution, see regulation 2.19.
Admission with recognition of prior learning (RPL)
1.22.
A faculty may permit students to enrol on a programme of study with recognition of prior
learning gained elsewhere or at the university. The university recognises 2 types of prior
learning:
• Prior certified learning (RPCL)
• Prior experiential learning (RPEL)
10
1.23.
All prior certified or experiential learning must be assessed according to the recognition of
prior learning procedure so that the student can demonstrate that they have met the
learning outcomes of the modules being claimed.
1.24.
The consideration of an application for prior certified or experiential learning towards an
award is a matter of academic judgement.
1.25.
If a student can demonstrate that the learning outcomes of prior certified or experiential
learning meet the learning objectives of specific modules on their programme, those
modules may be waived.
1.26.
Recognition of prior learning can only be applied for specific full modules or levels of
individual programmes. It cannot be awarded for credit or partial modules.
1.27.
Marks are not awarded for prior certified or experiential learning except where the
module being waived is using credit gained from one of the College’s freestanding
modules that has not been used as credit elsewhere within the College. In such cases, the
marks can be used as part of the final degree calculation of the new degree programme.
1.28.
Prior certified learning may only be recognised for college awards when the prior certified
learning is at the higher education level (e.g., levels 4-7 of the FHEQ).
1.29.
All prior certified learning must have been assessed and passed in order for the student to
use it to demonstrate that they have met the learning outcomes of the module being
claimed.
1.30.
Marks for study at institutions other than King’s will not normally be included in decisions
on classification of awards, and Assessment Sub-Boards may need to approve an
alternative method to derive the classification of awards for students with RPL.
Policies and Procedures
Admissions Policy
Admissions Interview Policy
Criminal Record Disclosure (Student Admissions) Policy
Applicant Complaints Policy (Student Admissions) Policy
Applicant Misconduct Policy
Recognition of Prior Learning Procedure
Useful Links
Undergraduate Admissions
Postgraduate Taught Admissions
Admissions Portal
Immigration and Visas
Undergraduate English language entry requirements
Postgraduate English language entry requirements
The framework for higher education qualifications of UK Degree Awarding Bodies
Glossary
11
CHAPTER 2: REGISTRATION AND ATTENDANCE
This section outlines the enrolment, registration and attendance requirements of students enrolled
on a programme. It includes information on minimum and maximum periods of study; the
parameters for interrupting study; and the conditions under which concurrent registration, transfer
of registration or registration for the same award are allowed. This section also includes information
on attendance and engagement and participating in recreational activities on a Wednesday
afternoon. It also includes information on the Associateship of King’s College (AKC) award.
Enrolment
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
2.6.
Postgraduate Research Student Enrolment
2.7.
Minimum and Maximum Periods and Interruption of Study
2.8.
2.9.
12
Programme type
Minimum period of study
Maximum period of study
Foundation Certificate
1 year full-time
2 years full-time
Undergraduate Diploma
2 years full-time
4 years part-time
18 months part-time (for
students entering with
advanced standing of 120
credits)
6 years full- and part-time
Foundation Degree
2 years full-time
3 or 4 years part-time
6 years full- and part-time
First Degrees (undergraduate
degrees at level 6 and integrated
masters degrees at level 7)
For MB BS & BDS see relevant
programme specifications for
details
3 years full-time
4 years full-time (MSci)
6-8 years part-time (precise
length to be stipulated in the
programme specification)
As stipulated in the
individual programme
specification but in no case
to exceed 10 years
Graduate Certificate
4 months full-time
8 months part-time
3 years full- and part-time
Graduate Diploma
8 months full-time
16 months part-time
4 years full- and part-time
Postgraduate Certificate
4 months full-time
6 months part-time
3 years full- and part-time
Postgraduate Diploma
8 months full-time
16 months part-time
4 years full- and part-time
Masters Degree
12-24 months full- time
24-48 months part-time
(precise length to be
stipulated in the programme
specification)
6 years full- and part-time
MClinDent
24 months full-time
48 months part-time
8 years full- and part-time
MNurs
24 months full-time
6 years full-time
DClinDent
36 months full-time
7 years full-time
PhD/MPhil/MPhil(Stud)/MD(Res)
24 months full-time
48 months part-time
7 years full-time
10 years part-time
Professional Doctorates
36 months full-time
72 months part-time
7 years full-time
10 years part-time
2.10.
2.11.
13
2.12.
2.13.
Registration
Concurrent Registration
2.14.
2.15.
2.16.
2.17.
2.18.
Transfer of Registration and Registration for the same Qualification
2.19.
2.20.
14
2.21.
2.22.
Attendance
2.23.
2.24.
2.25.
2.26.
Policies and Procedures
Terms and Conditions for Students
Fee Payment Terms & Conditions
Student Engagement & Attendance Monitoring Policy
Interruption of Study Policy and Procedure
Student Fee FAQs
Useful Links
Visa and International Student Advice
Programme Specifications
Collaborative Provision
Module Registration
Associate of King's College London
Glossary
15
CHAPTER 3: QUALIFICATION AND COURSE FRAMEWORK
This section outlines the awards currently offered by the College, including the level of each award
and the corresponding descriptor for that level. Please note, exit awards that are not offered as
standalone awards are detailed in Chapter 5: Progression and Award for Taught Programmes.
This section also outlines the relationship between the academic regulations and programme
specifications; the difference between core and non-core modules; provides details about module
level, status and value; and explains the marks required to pass a module component and an overall
module.
Each taught programme of study will have a programme specification approved by the relevant
Faculty Education Committee as part of the programme approval procedure and updated on an
annual basis. Programme specifications specify the duration of the programme in full-time and,
where applicable, part-time mode, and the minimum period of study for the award and the
maximum period for which credit for the award may be counted. The period of study will normally
be continuous unless the Academic Board has permitted an interruption, either generally by
regulation or in an individual case. Amendments to programme specifications will not normally be
introduced during an academic year. For some programmes, particularly those with Professional,
Statutory or Regulatory Bodies (PSRB) accreditation, any additional programme regulations are
contained within programme specifications.
Awards of King’s College London
3.1.
The university offers teaching and research at undergraduate, postgraduate taught and
postgraduate research levels. The university also offers teaching at pre-undergraduate
level. All programmes will be assigned to a level from the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)
Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree Awarding Bodies (FHEQ),
except pre-undergraduate programmes which are assigned to a level from the Regulated
Qualifications Framework (RQF), by the relevant Faculty Education Committee, as detailed
below.
Level
Awards
Level 3
Foundation Certificate
Level 4
Undergraduate Certificate (UGCert) (available as exit award only)
Level 5
Undergraduate Diploma (UGDip) (available as exit award only)
Level 6
Honours degree (Hons)
• Bachelor of Arts (BA)
• Bachelor of Engineering (BEng)
• Bachelor of Laws (LLB)
• Bachelor of Music (BMus)
• Bachelor of Science (BSc)
• Bachelor of Science (Engineering) (BSc (BEng))
• Intercalated Bachelor of Science (iBSc)
Professional Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE Professional)
Graduate Certificate (GradCert)
Graduate Diploma (GradDip)
Ordinary degree (Ord) (available as exit awards only)
Level 7
First degrees
• Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS)
• Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MB BS)
16
First degrees - Integrated Masters degrees
• Master of Engineering (MEng)
• Master of Pharmacy (MPharm)
• Master in Science (MSci)
Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert)
Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE)
Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip)
Masters degrees
• Master of Arts (MA)
• Master of Business Administration (MBA)
• Master of Clinical Dentistry (MClinDent)
• Master of Laws (LLM)
• Master of Music (MMus)
• Master of Nursing (MNurs)
• Master of Public Health (MPH)
• Master of Research (MRes)
• Master of Science (MSc)
• Master of Teaching and Learning (MTL) (not currently offered)
• Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA)
• Executive Master of Public Administration (EMPA)
Level 7 –
Research
degrees
Master of Philosophy (MPhil)
Master in Philosophical Studies (MPhilStud)
Level 8 –
Research
degrees
Doctor in Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy)
Doctor in Education (EdD) (not currently offered)
Doctor in Health Care (DHC)
Doctor of Medicine (Research) (MD(Res))
Doctor of Medicine (MD)
Doctor in Theology and Ministry (DThM)
Doctor of Ministry (DMin) (not currently offered)
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
Doctor in Professional Studies (DrPS)
Level 8 –
Higher
Doctorates
Doctor of Science (DSc) (not currently offered)
Doctor of Letters (DLitt) (not currently offered)
Doctor of Clinical Dentistry (DClinDent)
Other awards
– no
corresponding
level
Associateship of King’s College London (AKC)
King’s Experience Awards
In addition, the university offers programmes that have no corresponding award,
including Pre-Sessional English Programmes, Summer Programmes, and credit-bearing
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).
3.2.
All awards must have regard to the SEEC Level Descriptors.
3.3.
Foundation Certificate (level 3): An academically coherent programme of study that is
aligned to the Regulated Qualifications Framework and designed to ensure students can
demonstrate:
17
• the ability to identify and use relevant understanding, methods and skills to
complete tasks;
• address problems that, while well defined, have a measure of complexity;
• take responsibility for initiating and completing tasks and procedures;
• exercise autonomy and judgment within limited parameters;
• an awareness of different perspectives or approaches within an area of study or
work.
3.4.
All awards, except pre-undergraduate awards, must have regard to the provisions of the
QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education and the more discipline-specific subject
benchmark statements and QAA Characteristics Statements.
3.5.
All awards leading to professional registration and practice must be designed and taught in
accordance with the requirements of the respective Professional, Statutory or Regulatory
Body. This includes but is not limited to the General Dental Council, General Medical
Council, Nursing and Midwifery Council and Health and Care Professions Council.
3.6.
The following level descriptors are aligned to the QAA FHEQ descriptors and outline the
depth and complexity of each award level. These must be used as a reference point in the
development of programmes and modules, including any local marking criteria.
3.7.
Undergraduate Certificates (level 4): An academically coherent programme of study that
is designed to ensure students can demonstrate:
• knowledge of the underlying concepts and principles associated with their area(s)
of study;
• an ability to present, evaluate and interpret these concepts as well as qualitative
and quantitative data to develop theories and sound judgements;
• an ability to evaluate different approaches to problem solving;
• an ability to communicate work reliably and accurately, and with structured and
coherent arguments; and
• an ability to undertake further training and develop new skills.
3.8.
Undergraduate Diplomas and Foundation Degrees (level 5): An academically coherent
programme of study that is designed to ensure students can demonstrate:
• critical understanding of the concepts and principles of the area of study and the
way in which these have developed;
• knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in the area of study and an ability to
evaluate their application;
• an ability to apply underlying concepts and principles within a wider context;
18
• an ability to use a range of techniques to analyse information and propose
solutions to problems, especially within a work context;
• an ability to communicate effectively information, arguments and analysis; and
• an ability to undertake further training to develop existing knowledge and skills.
In addition, for Foundation Degrees:
• the acquisition of skills relevant to employment; and
• an ability to progress to the final stage of an appropriate first-degree programme
awarded with honours either directly or, where the nature of the programme for
the Foundation degree and/or the first degree makes it appropriate, after further
bridging study.
3.9.
First degrees (level 6 and 7): An academically coherent programme of study that is
designed to ensure students can demonstrate:
• conceptual understanding of key aspects of their field of study that enables
students:
o to devise and sustain arguments, and/or to solve problems, using a range of
ideas and techniques;
o to describe and comment upon particular aspects of current research, or
equivalent advanced scholarship, in the discipline; and
o to apply the methods and techniques that they have learned to review,
consolidate, extend and apply their knowledge and understanding;
• an ability to deploy accurately established techniques of analysis and enquiry
within a discipline;
• capacity for independent and critical thought to evaluate and identify a range of
solutions to a problem; and
• an ability to communicate information, ideas, problems and solutions to both
specialist and non-specialist audiences.
3.10.
Postgraduate Taught degrees (level 7): A programme of study beyond the standard first
degree level which assumes the general level of educational competence required for the
award of a first degree. This may include programmes of study which are ‘conversion
courses’ where graduates in one discipline acquire knowledge and develop a set of skills in
another discipline. The programme of study should normally include:
• a research project in a form appropriate to the discipline concerned as a core
component of the programme; and
• some part of the curriculum should be concerned with research methods
including awareness of ethical issues and, where relevant, health and safety
matters.
19
The programme and scheme of assessment should be designed to ensure students can
demonstrate:
• a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current
problems and/or new insights in their academic discipline, field of study or area of
professional practice;
• a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or
advanced scholarship;
• a conceptual understanding that enables students:
o to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the
discipline;
o to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where
appropriate, to propose new hypotheses;
o to demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems,
and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or
equivalent level; and
o a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and
enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline.
3.11.
Additional criteria are specified for some awards as listed below. Further information on
research degrees at level 8 can be found in regulation section 6.3 in the Framework for
Postgraduate Research Awards.
3.12.
Bachelor of Engineering (BEng): The programme of study shall give emphasis to
preparation for professional practice. It shall provide the necessary understanding of the
scientific basis of engineering and include a substantial engineering applications
component as an integrated part of the programme, together with some appreciation of
the industrial, social, environmental, and business environment.
3.13.
Master in Science (MSci): The programme of study shall include a major project and
provide a sound basis for a subsequent scientific or technically-based career or research.
3.14.
Master of Engineering (MEng): The programme of study shall be followed over a period of
time equivalent to four years full-time, of which not less than three academic years and
two semester shall be full-time university based study (which may include a year at
another institution of university status), and shall satisfy one or more of the following
criteria:
• provide for study of a particular engineering discipline in greater depth than the
Bachelor of Engineering;
• provide for multi-disciplinary study of a range of engineering disciplines;
together with all of the following criteria:
20
• include the teaching of design through the use of project work and case studies,
preferably in an industrial context;
• include a major project;
• demand a level of study and attainment which is equivalent to that required for a
postgraduate taught degree.
3.15.
Master of Pharmacy (MPharm): The programme of study, taught in accordance with
curricula that meet the requirements of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain,
shall provide for the study of two or more elective disciplines and shall include a major
research project.
3.16.
Master of Clinical Dentistry (MClinDent): The programme of study shall include academic
and clinical elements, the latter element providing a major component towards specialist
training in a designated clinical dental discipline.
3.17.
Master of Public Health (MPH): The programme of study should include a dissertation
project which provides a sound basis for a subsequent career as a public health
professional in an international, national or local government agency, in a non-
governmental or charitable organisation concerned with public health, or in a community
or public health environment, or in a university Department concerned with community or
public health.
3.18.
Master of Nursing (MNurs): The Master of Nursing will meet the characteristics associated
with a Professional or Practice Master’s degree:
• Learning and programme curricula will be in accordance with the requirements of
the Nursing & Midwifery Council (NMC);
• Programmes with the MNurs award will include practice placements to allow
students to complete the nursing proficiencies and practice hours required of
registered nurses as part of their training, per the requirements of the NMC;
• Programmes with the MNurs award will include research methods training, and a
30-credit module assessed aby project completed through independent study;
• Award of the Master of Nursing will meet the requirements for registration or
entry to the nursing profession in accordance with the requirements of the NMC.
3.19.
Master of Research (MRes): The programme of study shall:
• be a free-standing and formally examined prescribed programme of fulltime study
beyond the undergraduate degree level of at least one calendar year or its
equivalent in part-time study;
• provide a structured and progressive research training programme which is an
adequate foundation for doctoral study or a research career in industry or the
public sector;
21
• include a grounding in research techniques relevant to the broad disciplinary area.
At least one core module should be concerned with research methods including
awareness of ethical issues and, where relevant, health and safety matters;
• include a significant research component, which enables students to demonstrate
initiative and creativity and is assessed by means of a written report. The research
component should form a significant proportion (at least 75 credits) of the whole
programme and must be greater than the research dissertation for MA/MSc
awards in the same discipline;
• include elements designed to broaden students’ experiences by equipping them
with a range of transferable skills.
3.20.
Doctorate in Clinical Dentistry (DClinDent): The award will include a research project, plus
three research-based modules. The portfolio element will consist of case studies, clinical
portfolio, and work-based evaluations.
Programme Title (undergraduate only)
3.21.
For single honours with a supporting discipline, the programme title will be the main
discipline with the supporting discipline, on condition that students have obtained a
minimum of 255 credits in the main discipline and a minimum of 90 credits in the
supporting discipline.
3.22.
For joint honours, the programme will be discipline A and discipline B, on condition that
students have obtained a minimum of 120 credits in each discipline and an overall
minimum of 255 credits across both disciplines.
3.23.
For one-year intercalated BSc degree programmes:
a. where at least 75 credits have been gained in an appropriate subject the title will
be the appropriate subject with Basic Medical Sciences, Basic Dental Sciences or
Basic Veterinary Sciences.
b. where less than 75 credits have been gained, but at least 60 credits have been
gained in an appropriate subject: Basic Medical Sciences, Basic Dental Sciences or
Basic Veterinary Sciences with the appropriate subject or if 60 credits have been
gained in each of two of these subjects: Basic Medical Sciences, Basic Dental
Sciences or Basic Veterinary Sciences with one appropriate subject and the other
of these subjects.
Programme Specifications
3.24.
A programme of study and its associated modules must comply with the criteria
established for programmes of study (see above) and be approved by the relevant Faculty
Education Committee in accordance with the procedures agreed by the Academic Board
and/or its sub-committees before the programme may be offered. Modifications to
programmes of study or modifications to modules cannot normally be implemented in the
same year they are approved. Some programmes, such as those with PSRB requirements,
may have programme regulations in addition to the general academic regulations. These
will be detailed in the relevant programme specification.
22
3.25.
Programme specifications must provide the following details:
a. the programme title;
b. the duration of the programme in full-time and, where applicable, part-time
mode, including the minimum period of study for the award and the maximum
period for which credit for the award may be counted;
c. credit and module options, including the credit value of all modules, the number
of discipline specific credits that must be taken for both single and joint honours
degrees, the status of modules, and if any conditions apply;
d. the combination of modules that students will have to take and pass and at what
level in order to satisfy the requirements for the award and which, if any, must be
attempted in order to complete the programme of study. In no case may the
number of modules or level combinations be less than the minimum specified in
the credit tables;
e. the maximum number of credits for which students may be registered in an
academic year;
f. which faculty is responsible for offering reassessment for combined studies
programmes and any associated conditions;
g. any additional programme or non-credit requirements, including:
• Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements;
• details of conditions applying to students on study abroad or year in
industry programmes; and
h. any programme allowances:
• if any level 7 modules can be taken outside of the usual range of credit
levels specified in the award credit tables; and
• if additional credits are permitted. Any additional credits will contribute to
the degree algorithm.
Modules
3.26.
All modules are required to have a module specification that includes:
a. the module credit level and credit value;
b. whether the module is assessed by one or more methods;
c. the relative weighting of each assessment component and whether a pass or
qualifying mark must be achieved in that component in order to pass the module
overall;
d. the scheduling of assessments and reassessment opportunities, which are
normally held prior to the start of the next academic year;
23
e. whether the module is available for study abroad students.
3.27.
Modules can be core or non-core. Non-core modules will be one or more of the following:
a. Compulsory
b. Optional
c. Introductory
d. Professional Practice
e. Study Abroad
In addition, modules may have pre-requisites or co-requisites. Further information on
module definitions can be found in the Regulations Glossary.
3.28.
All pre-undergraduate and undergraduate modules at levels 3-6 have credit values in
multiples of 15. Exceptionally, College Education Committee may approve modules of a
lower credit value.
3.29.
All level 7 modules have credit values in multiples of 15. Level 7 research/dissertation
modules are worth 60 credits, or 120 for MRes programmes. Some postgraduate modules
have credit values of 5 or 10 for CPD or Executive Education purposes.
Exception to regulation 3.29: Integrated Apprenticeship of MSc Clinical Pharmacology
programme includes a 20 credit End Point Assessment module in order to comply with the
mandated structure for an integrated apprenticeship.
3.30.
5 and 10 credit modules at undergraduate level are only applicable to King’s Health
Partners short courses and credit bearing MOOCs.
3.31.
In order to complete a module, students must undertake the prescribed period of study,
which may include reaching a pass mark or qualifying mark for components of the module
and satisfy any other conditions which may be set out by the College.
3.32.
To be awarded credit the whole module must be passed. Credit for a module cannot be
divided.
Policies and Procedures
Quality Assurance Handbook
Code of Practice for Research Governance and Dissertation Framework
Integrated Masters Programmes Policy
Sunset Clause for New Taught Programmes Policy
Short Course Policy
Module & Teaching Evaluation Policy
Professional, Statutory & Regulatory Body (PSRB) Policy
Interruption of Study Policy and Procedure
Validated Provision Procedures
Useful Links
Programme Specifications
KEATS
Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree Awarding Bodies
Glossary
24
CHAPTER 4: ASSESSMENT FOR TAUGHT PROGRAMMES
This section outlines the assessment rules for taught programmes or taught components of research
awards at King’s and should be read in conjunction with programme and module specifications. This
section includes the rules on assessment scheduling; the responsibilities of markers and internal
examiners; the rules governing marking and the corresponding pass marks for different level
modules; alternative assessment; mitigating circumstances; and the rules governing late submission
of coursework. These regulations apply to all forms of summative assessment.
This section also outlines the rules governing reassessment, including the responsibilities of
Assessment Boards and Sub-Boards for ensuring that examination and assessment procedures are
carried out in accordance with academic regulations and academic policies in a fair and impartial
manner. Module specifications will stipulate how students are to be reassessed and any conditions
that apply to determine whether the learning outcomes of the module have been achieved, taking
into consideration that the final module mark will be capped at the relevant pass mark.
Assessment and Feedback for Postgraduate Research Awards can be found in Chapter 6: Framework
for Postgraduate Research Awards.
General
4.1.
All students must abide by the regulations and policies governing assessments and
examinations. Failure to do so is an offence and may be dealt with in accordance with the
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure.
4.2.
Assessment Sub-Boards are responsible for setting assessments and drawing up marking
schemes.
4.3.
Students registered for assessments are expected to be present or submit on the dates
specified to them unless a mitigation has been granted.
4.4.
Individual programme specifications may prescribe conditions for assessment where
prior disclosure of questions is applicable. In such cases, the question papers must be
made available to all students at the same time.
Scheduling
4.5.
For on-campus programmes, the timetables of examinations scheduled during the three
main examination periods are published by the Assessment and Examinations Office.
These examination periods are normally:
• Period 1 –the second week of January;
• Period 2 – five weeks starting in May;
• Period 3 – two weeks in August.
4.6.
The Assessment and Examinations Office may make alternative arrangements for
students who are timetabled for two in-person examinations which overlap or coincide.
For remote examinations, academic departments will make arrangements in such cases.
4.7.
All other assessments (excluding examinations scheduled during the main examination
periods) will have deadlines determined by the Department.
25
4.8.
In exceptional circumstances, provision may be made for an international student to
undertake an alternative form of assessment or be considered for alternative venue
arrangements, if they have been granted the opportunity to sit a resit or replacement
examination in their home country and the Assessment Sub-Board considers it
impracticable to sit the original assessment due to time differences. Any alternative
venue arrangements will be determined by the Assessment and Examinations Office and
the examinations will not be scheduled before the published UK date and time.
Conduct
4.9.
Students must comply with the rules set out in the Examination Information for
Candidates as well as the Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure and any instructions
provided by the student’s faculty or Department. Any breaches of these rules will be
considered misconduct.
4.10.
Students must write clearly in English, or the language specified for the assessment.
4.11.
Examiners shall not be required to mark illegible answers to handwritten assessments. If
any part of a script is deemed illegible, students may be required, at the discretion of the
examiners, either to undertake an oral examination or to have the assessment
transcribed under secure conditions, line for line, page for page and at the student’s
expense. Examiners may order any other appropriate measure at their discretion. No
concessions may be granted for illegibility in respect of specified awards where a
registering body imposes such conditions.
Examiners
4.12.
Examiners should maintain the secrecy of unseen examination papers until taken by
students.
4.13.
Disclosure of questions in advance of an unseen examination is an offence and may lead
to action being taken under the College’s disciplinary procedures.
4.14.
Examiners are required to maintain the secrecy of any individual questions that are
intended to be used, or reused, for summative assessment.
4.15.
Examiners should ensure that information relating to assessment is held securely in
accordance with relevant university policies and procedures in relation to the processing
of personal data.
4.16.
Examiners should use the full range of marks.
4.17.
Exam scripts and lists of marks are confidential. Examiners must make and retain a secure
copy of mark lists or other assessment details before passing on scripts to another
marker or to the Chair of the Assessment Sub-Board.
4.18.
The identity of students will be withheld from all Examiners so far as is practicable until
the marking process is complete.
Alternative Assessment
4.19.
Under exceptional circumstances, provision may be made for alternative formats of
assessment. Students given permission to undertake an alternative format of assessment
will be assessed on equal terms with other students.
26
4.20.
The Chair of the Assessment Sub-Board shall obtain the agreement of an External
Examiner to the proposed alternative assessment and report the matter to the Chair of
the Assessment Board.
4.21.
Students may apply for mitigating circumstances if an unforeseen event prevents them
from completing an assessment.
Personalised Assessment Arrangements (PAA)
4.22.
Students may apply for Personalised Assessment Arrangements. If the Personalised
Assessment Arrangements Applications Panel, in consultation with the Assessment Sub-
Board, considers the original format of the assessment to be impracticable for that
student, or if the duration of the examination with any additional arrangements in place
extends over 4.5 hours, provision may be made for a student to undertake an assessment
in an alternative format.
Study Abroad
4.23.
The Assessment Sub-Board must make provision for students to take an alternative
assessment if their study abroad activity prevents them from sitting an examination at
the same time as the rest of their cohort.
Mitigating Circumstances
4.24.
The university defines mitigating circumstances as recognisably disruptive or unexpected
events beyond the student’s control that might have a significant and adverse impact on
their academic performance. The Mitigating Circumstances Policy applies to students on
taught programmes. Marks will never be raised due to mitigating circumstances.
Late Submission of Coursework
4.25.
A student who either fails to submit coursework for assessment or submits after the
deadline will have an automatic penalty applied unless:
a. they have requested an extension; or
b. they have submitted a successful mitigating circumstances request giving valid
reasons for submitting late work.
4.26.
For coursework where the submission deadline is 10 working days or more after the
coursework is set, work submitted within 24-hours of the deadline will be marked but 10
raw marks will be deducted where the assessment is marked out of 100. Where the
assessment is not marked out of 100, the penalty should be adjusted accordingly and
approved by the relevant Assessment Board. If the deduction takes a student below the
pass mark, the coursework mark will be capped at the pass mark.
4.27.
Where a student submits an assessment late but within 24 hours and subsequently fails
the assessment, the late submission penalty of deducting 10 raw marks will not be
applied.
4.28.
For coursework where the submission deadline is 9 or fewer working days after the
coursework is set, work submitted within 24-hours of the deadline will be marked but
students who pass the coursework will have the coursework mark capped at the pass
mark.
27
4.29.
For assessments with a deadline within 24 hours of the assessment being set, the
deadline will not be extended.
4.30.
Work submitted after 24-hour of the deadline will receive a mark of zero and the
reassessment rules will apply.
4.31.
For remote examinations, students must take and submit the examination within the
permitted timeframe. Examinations not submitted within the permitted timeframe will
receive a mark of zero. In such instances a student may, at the discretion of the relevant
Assessment Sub-Board, be permitted to attempt the examination again if the regulations
for the programme permit such reassessment.
4.32.
Students should refer to their programme specification for any PSRB requirements that
might apply to their programme.
Marking and Pass Marks
4.33.
All assessments are marked out of 100 in accordance with the university marking criteria;
discipline specific criteria where issued; and the stepped marking scheme where
applicable. The College Marking Framework is here.
4.34.
Discipline-specific marking schemes may be adapted from the College Marking Criteria
and schemes must be approved by the respective faculty on an annual basis.
4.35.
All summative assessment must be subject to a form of second marking, details of which
can be found in the College Marking Framework.
4.36.
Modules at Level 3-6:
• The overall module pass mark is 40;
• The pass mark for each module component is 40, unless a qualifying mark has
been set;
• Programme specifications and/or module specifications will outline conditions
relating to qualifying marks (regulation 4.69).
4.37.
Modules at Level 7:
• The overall module pass mark is 50;
• The pass mark for each module component is 50, unless a qualifying mark has
been set;
• Programme specifications and/or module specifications will outline conditions
relating to qualifying marks.
4.38.
Programmes that lead to professional registration and the Executive LLM apply a pass/fail
marking criteria.
4.39.
Scaling of module marks or final overall scores to a predetermined distribution shall not
be employed by the examiners.
4.40.
All overall module marks shall be rounded up (≥ 0.5) or rounded down (< 0.5) to the
nearest integer.
28
4.41.
Where a module is assessed by more than one component of assessment and the
module or programme specification do not specify a qualifying mark or core competency
for any individual component of assessment, then a student will have achieved the
learning outcomes of the module if they gain the relevant pass mark in the aggregate
mark for the module.
4.42.
Confirmed marks of 69, 59, 49, and 39 indicate agreement that the assessment is not
deserving of the class above.
4.43.
A minimum level of attainment (a qualifying mark) may be required for a specific
component within a module. In such instances, achieving the qualifying mark is a pre-
requisite of passing the module.
Provisional Marks
4.44.
Provisional marks are marks post-marking but prior to the meeting of the Assessment
Sub-Board. Provisional marks relating to individual elements of assessment may be
released to students provided the work in question has been marked in accordance with
the College Marking Framework and marks are clearly labelled as “provisional and may
be subject to change”.
Ratified Marks
4.45.
Results of assessments are confidential until the Assessment Sub-Board has met to ratify
them.
4.46.
The only occasion when a decision relating to ratified results can be modified, is under
the provisions of the academic appeals process. Where a department identifies or
acknowledges an administrative error, it can be corrected by the department without the
need for students to submit an academic appeal.
4.47.
The assessment marks of individual students, other than grades for final examinations for
the unclassified degrees in the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine and the Faculty of
Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, may be released on request to government
agencies and research councils for the purpose of assessing applications for studentships
for postgraduate degrees; and to institutions of higher education within the United
Kingdom and overseas for the purposes of credit transfer.
4.48.
Assessment results are communicated to all students within a cohort at the same time
and in the same manner once ratified by the relevant Assessment Sub-Board.
Exception: MB BS students intercalating in their fourth year.
Feedback
Provision of Feedback
4.49.
Feedback (on assessment performance) and feedforward (on how students can improve
for subsequent assessments) are an integral part of the assessment process. Feedback
should relate to the assessment criteria, which in turn should relate to the relevant
Learning Outcomes.
4.50.
Regular opportunities for formative feedback should form part of a programme’s
structure. This is so students can receive indicative information about their performance
and/or how they can build on skills and knowledge required for summative assessment.
29
Formative feedback can be provided in a variety of formats and further information on
feedback delivery methods is detailed in the Feedback Policy.
4.51.
Students must receive some form of feedback on ALL summative assessments. This can
be provided in a variety of formats and further information on feedback delivery
methods is detailed in the Feedback Policy. Students should have a clear understanding
of how this feedback will be provided.
Timeliness of Feedback
4.52.
Faculties and Departments must ensure that students have a clear understanding of
when they will receive their feedback for both formative and summative assessment. For
summative coursework this should normally be within four weeks of the submission
deadline and any changes to this should be under exceptional circumstances only and
communicated to students in advance of the four-week date.
Reassessment
General
4.53.
Reassessment is at the discretion of the Assessment Sub-Board. Students will normally be
offered one reassessment opportunity if they:
a. fail to obtain a qualifying mark in a module or module component; or
b. fail any module with a mark outside of the condonable range; or
c. fail to achieve a pass mark in a core module.
4.54.
Where students do not achieve the aggregate pass mark in a module at the first attempt,
the module specification will outline how they are to be reassessed, if reassessment may
be in a different format to the original assessment, and any additional conditions
attached to the reassessment.
4.55.
Where students do not achieve the aggregate pass mark of a module due to failing one or
more components of the module, they should only be reassessed in the failed
components. Programmes with PSRB accreditation may require reassessment of all
components and where this is required, this will be stipulated in the module
specification. Any other exception to this must be approved via an exemption.
4.56.
Following reassessment of any component of the module, the final overall module mark
will be capped at the relevant pass mark, unless covered by the core competency clause
below.
4.57.
For reassessment of module components, individual assessment marks will be recorded
uncapped on a student’s record. If they do not achieve a pass mark at reassessment, the
highest mark of any attempt will be recorded on the student’s record and transcript.
4.58.
Where students do not achieve a mark within the condonable range in a non-core
module, an Assessment Sub-Board may permit students to register for a substitute
module, if allowed in the programme specification.
30
Pre-undergraduate
4.59.
Students will be offered one reassessment opportunity in failed core modules.
4.60.
Students will not normally be offered a reassessment opportunity in non-core modules
they have failed if:
a. they have achieved a mark in the condonable range, and they have not reached
the overall condonable credit volume permitted; or
b. they have achieved a mark in the condonable range and have met the
requirements for their registered award.
Undergraduate
4.61.
Students will be offered one reassessment opportunity in failed core modules.
4.62.
Students in the first year of their studies will not normally be offered reassessment
opportunities in failed non-core modules if the compensation rules can be applied.
4.63.
Students in year two and above will not normally be offered a reassessment opportunity
in failed non-core modules if:
a. they have achieved a mark in the condonable range, and they have not reached
the overall condonable credit volume permitted; or
b. they have achieved a mark in the condonable range and have met the
requirements for their registered award.
4.64.
Students can opt into a reassessment opportunity in a failed non-core module and if
successful will achieve a capped pass mark. Students will be granted a single resit
opportunity for each module.
Postgraduate Taught
4.65.
Students will be offered one reassessment opportunity in core modules that they have
failed.
4.66.
Students can opt into a reassessment opportunity in a failed non-core module and if
successful will achieve a capped pass mark. Students will be granted a single resit
opportunity for each module.
4.67.
Students will not normally be offered a reassessment opportunity in non-core modules
they have failed if they have achieved a mark in the condonable range and have met the
requirements for their registered award.
4.68.
Students who do not meet the requirements of an award, but have been offered a
reassessment opportunity, will normally be reassessed, and an Assessment Sub-Board
convened to reconsider their award, within four calendar months and no longer than six
calendar months, from the date that students were invited to resit or resubmit.
31
Qualifying Marks
4.69.
Where a module is assessed by more than one component of assessment which have
specified qualifying mark(s) then the module specifications will outline which one of the
following will apply when students fail that specified component:
a. Students who do not achieve the qualifying mark will be reassessed in that
component of assessment. The final module mark will be capped at the relevant
pass mark;
b. Students who do not achieve the qualifying mark will be reassessed in all
components of assessment of the module. The final module mark will be capped
at the relevant pass mark.
Core Competency Components
4.70.
If a module component is defined in the module specification as a core competency,
students are required to achieve a minimum acceptable standard in that activity as part
of their professional portfolio.
4.71.
If the acceptable standard has been achieved at the first attempt, a numerical mark will
be awarded in accordance with the published marking scheme.
4.72.
Students who fail a core competency module component will be allowed a prescribed
number of further attempts. The numerical mark awarded for the reassessed component
will be capped at the pass mark; however, the overall module mark will not be capped.
Scheduling and requirements for reassessment
4.73.
Programme specifications will clarify the responsibility for offering reassessment to
students on joint honours programmes, including any conditions attached to the
reassessment.
4.74.
Where students have been offered a reassessment opportunity, the Assessment Sub-
Board will determine whether they are required to sit the assessment with or without
further attendance.
4.75.
With the exception of cases where students are required to resit the assessment with
attendance, all reassessment attempts will normally be held prior to the start of the next
academic year.
4.76.
Students who fail examinations held during Assessment Period 1 or 2 will be reassessed
in Assessment Period 3. For specific rules for PGT reassessment please refer to regulation
4.68 which takes precedence.
4.77.
Reassessment for King’s Online Managed programmes will normally take place in the
next teaching period unless a student submits a mitigating circumstances request or
takes a formal interruption of study. An informal interruption of study will not exempt a
student from reassessment.
4.78.
Reassessment for credit-bearing Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) will take place
during the next run of MOOCs. A formal calendar of dates will be published in advance.
32
Termination
4.79.
Where an Assessment Sub-Board determines that students may not be permitted a
further attempt at reassessment, and where this decision would prevent them from
completing their programme of study, their registration will be terminated. The
Assessment Sub-Board will consider if students are eligible for an exit award.
Intellectual Property and Access to Examination Scripts
4.80.
Original scripts for written examinations are the property of the university and will not be
returned to students. Provisions shall be made for students to view scripts. Other
assessed material may be returned to students, unless prevented by the academic
regulations.
4.81.
If a faculty wishes to make a completed assessment available for consultation or
borrowing this must be done in accordance with the College Code of Practice on
Intellectual Property, Commercial Exploitation and Financial Benefit.
Policies and Procedures
Marking, College Framework
Feedback Policy
Mitigating Circumstances Policy
Armed Forces, Support for Students
International Athlete Support Policy
Multiple Choice Question Policy
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Interruption of Study Policy and Procedure
Guidance for staff on providing examination scripts to students
Digital Education, Online Examinations Using KEATS
External Examiners Guidance
Useful Links
Academic Misconduct, Student Conduct and Appeals Office
Personalised Assessment Arrangements
Student Services Online
Assessment Boards, Assessment Sub-Boards and External Examiners
Glossary
33
CHAPTER 5: PROGRESSION AND AWARD FOR TAUGHT
PROGRAMMES
PROGRESSION
This section outlines the progression rules for taught programmes at the College, including the
minimum and maximum number and level of credits that a student must take each year; the way in
which results are calculated and combined to determine whether a student can progress from one
year of study to the next; and the maximum number and level of credits that may be condoned each
year and at programme level. This section outlines progression with reassessment and deferrals as
well as the rules surrounding substitute modules. The circumstances under which marks and/or
credit can be transferred are also included in this section.
These regulations apply to all taught students who started year one of their programme in 2023/24.
Direct entrants to year two of a programme in 2023/24 should refer to the 2022/23 regulations for
details of the regulations that apply to them. Students taking an intercalated degree and direct
entrants to year three of a programme in 2023/24 should refer to the 2021/22 regulations for details
of the regulations that apply to them.
All awards
5.1.
Students must meet minimum progression requirements. Any additions to minimum
progression requirements are detailed in programme specifications.
5.2.
Students can only progress if it remains possible for them to obtain the minimum credit
required for their registered award.
Programmes with a Semester/Year abroad or in industry
5.3.
For students who opt to study abroad for a semester where this is not part of the
programme requirements, a semester abroad equates to 60 credits. This credit is
included in the minimum credit required for award. Students must pass their semester
for credit to be transferred. Further detail is included in the programme specification.
5.4.
Where students take a semester abroad, they must pass King’s modules worth 60 credits
in the corresponding level in the other half of the year.
5.5.
For students who opt to study abroad for a year where this is not part of their
programme requirements, a year abroad equates to 120 credits. Students must pass their
year abroad for credit to be transferred. This increases the standard minimum credit
required for a 3-year undergraduate or a 4-year integrated masters degree, which is
stated in the credit tables, by 120 credits.
5.6.
Details of conditions applying to students on programmes where a semester or year in
industry is part of the programme requirements, will be outlined in the programme
specification.
Compensated Credit (undergraduate and integrated masters, year one)
5.7.
Non-core modules at level 4 worth up to 30 credits may be compensated on condition
that students have:
34
a. achieved a pass mark in all core modules and in a minimum of 90 credits overall;
and
b. achieved a module mark of 1 in the module to be compensated, taking into
consideration the outcome of any mitigating circumstances request.
Students who meet these conditions will be awarded 120 credits overall for year one,
where required. Where PSRB requirements apply, details should be contained in the
programme specifications.
Condonement (all pre-undergraduate programmes, undergraduate programmes in year 2
onwards; all postgraduate taught programmes)
5.8.
Core modules cannot be condoned.
5.9.
Non-core modules may be condoned where permitted in the programme specification
and as outlined in the credit tables below. Condonement may not be possible where
there are special requirements for some programmes e.g. Professional, Statutory and
Regulatory Bodies regulations.
5.10.
For non-core modules at level 3, 5 and 6, condonement will normally be granted after the
first attempt, where students have achieved a mark in the range of 1-39 inclusive.
5.11.
For non-core modules at level 7, condonement will normally be granted after the first
attempt where students have achieved a mark in the range of 40-49 inclusive. For some
modules in the departments of mathematics, informatics and physics, alternative
condonement arrangements may apply and will be detailed in the programme
specification.
5.12.
For three-year programmes and four-year programmes that include a year abroad/year
in industry, the maximum credit allowed for modules with marks in the condonable range
across levels 5 and above will not exceed 30.
5.13.
For four-year programmes or five-year programmes that include a year abroad/year in
industry (where the final year consists of level 7 modules), the maximum credit allowed
for modules with marks in the condonable range will not exceed 45. This includes no
more than 30 credits at level 5 and 6 combined, and no more than 30 credits at level 7.
5.14.
For all other programmes, the maximum credit allowed for modules with marks in the
condonable range is outlined in the credit tables below.
5.15.
Once a module has been condoned, a student cannot be reassessed in it at a later stage.
5.16.
Having exhausted all reassessment opportunities and having reached the maximum
credit allowed for modules with marks in the condonable range, a student will be
considered for an exit award. Students who have exceeded the maximum credits allowed
for modules with marks in the condonable range will not be able to register on further
modules to achieve a better exit award.
Additional Credit
5.17.
For all undergraduate and postgraduate taught programmes,
35
a. Students may take up to 30 additional credits at level 5 or above. Such credits will
contribute to the degree algorithm;
b. Additional credits over and above the maximum permitted can be taken on a
paid-for stand-alone basis and will not contribute to the degree algorithm;
c. Modules taken as part of the degree programme cannot be substituted with
additional credit modules taken on a standalone basis.
In addition, for undergraduate programmes,
d. Students will not be expected to take additional credits in year one. In
exceptional circumstances, and with the agreement of the Programme Director, it
may be possible for a student to take a maximum of 15 additional level 4 credits
on a paid-for standalone basis on condition that in doing so their main discipline
is not compromised. Any 15 additional level 4 credits taken on a paid-for
standalone basis will not contribute to the degree classification and will not
contribute to progression requirements.
e. Students should not take level 4 credits in year two and above, unless taken on a
paid for standalone basis. Such credits will not contribute to the degree
classification. In exceptional circumstances, where the Programme Director
deems the level 4 additional credit is pertinent to the main discipline of study, the
level 4 credits may be taken in year two and there will be no cost attached.
Substitute Modules (all programmes excluding pre-undergraduate)
5.18.
Where a student fails a non-core module at the first attempt with a mark that is not in
the condonable range, an Assessment Sub-Board may permit a student to register for a
substitute module, providing it is allowed in the programme specification. The following
conditions apply:
a. the Assessment Sub-Board must be satisfied that on academic grounds students
are unlikely to achieve a mark in the condonable range at the next attempt in the
original module;
b. the substitute module must be of the same credit value and level as the original
module;
c. if more than one substitute module is offered, these must cumulatively hold the
same credit value of the module to be replaced;
d. the original module being substituted may not be compulsory or core to the
programme of study;
e. substitute modules are included as part of the condonement allowance.
5.19.
Under these circumstances, neither the credit nor the marks gained by students in the
original module will be used by the Assessment Sub-Board in determining any final award
classification.
5.20.
Marks gained by students in substitute modules will be capped at the pass mark.
36
5.21.
Students will only be allowed one assessment attempt at a substitute module.
Credit Tables for Undergraduate and Integrated Masters
5.22.
The minimum progression requirements for a full-time undergraduate degree
programme are:
a. year one to year two: 90 credits passed at the pass mark, excluding modules that
have been compensated;
b. year two to year three: 210 credits, which must include 90 credits passed with a
pass mark in year two;
c. year three to year four: 330 credits, which must include 90 credits passed with a
pass mark in year three.
5.23.
Students who defer modules worth up to 30 credits will be able to progress on the
condition they achieve a pass mark in the remaining 90-105 credits.
5.24.
Any module that has not received a pass or compensated pass in year one should
normally be attempted and passed or compensated before the end of Assessment Period
1 of year two. All outstanding deferred modules from year one must be completed by the
end of year two for the student to progress to further years of study.
5.25.
For years two and above, students will be offered replacement assessment at the earliest
opportunity and, where possible, students are encouraged not to carry deferrals beyond
the end of Assessment Period 1 of the following academic year. All outstanding deferred
assessments must be completed by the end of the following academic year for the
student to progress to further years of study.
5.26.
Students will not be able to progress beyond year two, or enrol on further modules, if
they have marks within the condonable range in modules worth 30 credits at level 5 or
above and fail a further module.
37
5.27. THREE-YEAR HONOURS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit
allowance that
can be
condoned
Minimum
discipline
specific
credit over
programme
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest
level
Minimum
credits at
highest
level
Compensation and condonement for non-
core modules
Unless specified, credit for modules that have
been condoned will not count towards the
minimum credits required at the highest
level. Substitute modules are included as part
of the condonement allowance, even if they
are passed at the normal pass mark.
Bachelor of Arts (BA)
Bachelor of Engineering (BEng)
Bachelor of Laws (LLB)
Bachelor of Music (BMus)
Bachelor of Science (BSc), excluding
the Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery
and Palliative Care and BSc Dental
Therapy & Hygiene
Bachelor of Science (Engineering)
(BSc (Eng))
6
360
255
4-6
120
90
Compensation: Non-core modules worth up
to 30 credits at level 4 may be compensated
in year one
Condonement: Non-core modules worth up
to 30 credits at level 5 and above may be
condoned in years two and above (level 7
credits may be included but a level 7
condoned fail mark will be required)
Bachelor of Science pre-registration
programmes in FNMPC (BSc),
6
360
360
4-6
120
120
Compensation: Non-core modules worth up
to 15 credits at level 4 may be compensated
in year one
Condonement: No condonement permitted
Bachelor of Science (BSc) Dental
Therapy & Hygiene
a. Students must normally take a minimum of 120 credits per year, including 120 credits at level 4 in year one.
b. For all study undertaken at King’s, students must take a minimum of 75 discipline specific credits per year and a minimum of 255 discipline specific credits over three
years. This excludes Bachelor of Science pre-registration programmes in FNMPC and Bachelor of Science (BSc) Dental Therapy & Hygiene where all module options
are discipline specific.
c. In year two, students must take a minimum of 90 credits at level 5 or above. A further 30 credits at level 5 or 6 must be taken, as a minimum, as specified in the
programme specification.
38
d. In year three, students must take a minimum of 90 level 6 credits. A further 30 credits at level 5 or 6 must be taken as a minimum, as specified in the programme
specification.
e. For students on an LLB programme, all credits taken in years two and above will be level 6.
5.28. INTEGRATED MASTERS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum
credit required
for award
including credit
allowance that
can be
condoned
Minimum
discipline
specific credit
over 4 years
Range
of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest
level
Minimum
credits at
highest
level
Compensation and condonement for non-core
modules
Unless specified, credit for modules that have been
condoned will not count towards the minimum credits
required at the highest level. Substitute modules are
included as part of the condonement allowance, even
if they are passed at the normal pass mark.
Master of Engineering (MEng)
Master of Pharmacy
(MPharm)
Master in Science (MSci)
7
480
320
4-7
120
120
Compensation: Up to 30 credits for level 4 modules
may be compensated in year one
Condonement: The overall condonable credit will not
exceed 45. This includes no more than 30 credits level
5 and 6 combined, and no more than 30 credits at
level 7
Exceptionally, MSci and MEng programmes may have
modules worth up to 30 credits with marks within the
condonable range count towards the minimum 120
credits at level 7
a. The minimum number of credits that must be obtained over the programme is 480;
b. Students must take a minimum of 120 credits per year, including a minimum of 75 discipline specific credits;
c. Students must take a minimum of 120 credits at level 4 in year one;
d. Students must take a minimum of 90 credits at level 5 in year two. A further 30 credits at level 5 or above must be taken, as specified in the programme specification;
e. Students must take a minimum of 90 credits at level 6 in year three. A further 30 credits at level 5 or above must be taken as specified in the programme
specification;
f. Students must take a minimum of 120 credits at level 7 in year four.
39
5.30. PROGRAMMES WITH ADVANCED STANDING ENTRY REQUIREMENTS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit allowance
that can be
condoned
Range
of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest
level
Compensation and Condonement
Specialist Community Public Health
Nursing (BSc),
Bachelor of Science post-registration
programmes in the Faculty of Nursing,
Midwifery and Palliative Care (BSc –
except Specialist Community Public Health
Nursing)
6
120
6
N/A
120
No compensation
No condonement
5.29. ONE YEAR HONOURS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit allowance
that can be
condoned
Range
of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest
level
Compensation and Condonement for non-core
modules
Unless specified, credit for modules that have been
condoned will not count towards the minimum credits
required at the highest level. Substitute modules are
included as part of the condonement allowance, even if
they are passed at the normal pass mark
Bachelor of Science Intercalated (iBSc)
6
120
5-6
30
90
30 credits at levels 5-6 with a condoned fail mark (level
7 credits may be included but a level 7 condoned fail
mark will be required)
a. Students must take a minimum of 90 discipline specific level 6 credits. A further 30 credits at level 5 or 6 must be taken, as a minimum, as specified in the programme
specification;
b. Programme specifications will outline if level 7 modules are permitted or required.
40
5.31. BACHELOR OF DENTAL SURGERY (BDS)
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for award
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Compensation and Condonement
Three-year programme
7
540
6
540
No compensation
No condonement
Four-year programme
7
660
5-6
120
Five-year programme
7
780
4-6
120
a. All credit to be passed with a mark of 50.
5.32. BACHELOR OF MEDICINE AND BACHELOR OF SURGERY (MB BS)
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for award
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Compensation and Condonement
Four-year programme
7
675
4-6
135
510
No compensation
No condonement
Five-year programme
7
780
4-6
120
510
a. All core credit to be passed with a mark of 50, unless it is a Student Selected Component, Scholarly Project or Quality Improvement and Evidence Based Practice Project,
all of which must be passed with a mark of 40.
5.33. PRE-UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMMES
RQF
Level
Minimum credit
required for award
including credit
allowance that can
be condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Condonement for non-core modules
Foundation Certificate
3
120
3
Non-core modules worth up to 30 credits
a. Students must take 120 credits per year;
b. Students must achieve a pass mark in all core modules;
c. Students must achieve a pass mark of 40 in two of the three non-core modules.
41
5.34. FOUNDATION DEGREES
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for award
including credit
allowance that can
be condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Compensation and Condonement for non-core modules
Unless specified, credit for modules that have been condoned
will not count towards the minimum credits required at the
highest level. Substitute modules are included as part of the
condonement allowance, even if they are passed at the
normal pass mark.
Foundation Degree (FdA,
FdSc)
5
240
4-5
120
120
15 compensated credits at level 4 or 15 credits at level 5 with
marks within the condonable range
Foundation Degree top-up
year
6
120
4-6
15
90
30 credits at levels 4-6 with marks within the condonable
range if the marks fall within levels 5 and 6
5.35. GRADUATE AWARDS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for award
including credit
allowance that can
be condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Compensation and Condonement for non-core modules
Unless specified, credit for modules that have been condoned
will not count towards the minimum credits required at the
highest level. Substitute modules are included as part of the
condonement allowance, even if they are passed at the
normal pass mark.
Graduate Certificate
(GradCert)
6
60
4-6
15
30
No condonement
Graduate Diploma (GradDip)
6
120
4-6
30
90
30 credits at level 5-6 may be condoned (level 7 credits may
be included but a level 7 condoned fail mark will be required)
42
Professional Graduate
Certificate in Education (PGCE
Professional)
6
120
6
N/A
120
No condonement
Credit tables for Postgraduate Taught Awards
5.36.
Any progression requirements for postgraduate taught programmes will be listed in the programme specification.
5.37. MASTERS AND EXECUTIVE MASTERS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit allowance
that can be
condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Condonement for non-core modules
Unless specified, modules that have been condoned may not
count towards the minimum credits required at the highest
level. Substitute modules are included as part of the
condonement allowance, even if they are passed at the
normal pass mark
Master of Arts (MA)
Master of Business
Administration (MBA)
Master of Laws (LLM)
Master of Music (MMus)
Master of Public Health (MPH)
Master of Research (MRes)
Master of Science (MSc)
Master of Teaching and
Learning (MTL)
7
180 – 360
6-7
30
150 (to include
dissertation)
The condonement allowance is 30 credits at level 7 with a
mark in the condonable range.
The dissertation cannot be condoned.
Any level 6 modules (even those passed at a mark greater
than 50) will be included in this condonement allowance
Master of Clinical Dentistry
(MClinDent)
7
360
6-7
30
330
Master of Nursing (MNurs)
7
180
6-7
30
330
All credit to be passed with the minimum pass mark
Executive Master of Business
Administration (EMBA)
Executive Master of Public
Administration (EMPA)
7
180
7
N/A
180
The condonement allowance is 30 credits at level 7 with a
mark in the condonable range
a. Students must achieve an overall average of at least 50 with no module mark below 40.
43
b. Students must achieve a mark of at least 50 in 150 credits (300 credits for MClinDent) including the dissertation, and a mark of at least 40 in the remainder.
Regulations on marking (4.33-4.72) and condonement (5.8-5.16) apply and should be read in conjunction with these regulations.
5.38. POSTGRADUATE CERTIFICATES AND DIPLOMAS
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit allowance
that can be
condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Condonement for non-core modules
Unless specified, modules that have been condoned may not
count towards the minimum credits required at the highest
level. Substitute modules are included as part of the
condonement allowance, even if they are passed at the
normal pass mark
Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip)
7
120
6-7
30
90
30 credits at level 7 with a condoned masters fail mark
permitted, dissertation excluded. Any level 6 modules (even
those passed at a mark greater than 50) will be included in
this maximum
Postgraduate Certificate
(PGCert)
7
60
6-7
15
45
15 credits at level 7 with a condoned masters fail mark
permitted, dissertation excluded. Any level 6 modules (even
those passed at a mark greater than 50) will be included in
this maximum
Postgraduate Certificate in
Education (PGCE)
7
120
6-7
60
60
No condoned fails
a. Students must achieve an overall average of at least 50 with no module mark below 40;
b. Students must achieve a mark of at least 50 in 90 credits (PGDip) or 45 credits (PCCert), and a mark of at least 40 in the remainder.
5.39. DOCTOR OF CLINICAL DENTISTRY
FHEQ
Level
Minimum credit
required for
award including
credit allowance
that can be
condoned
Range of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest level
Minimum
credits at
highest level
Condonement for non-core modules
Unless specified, modules that have been condoned may not
count towards the minimum credits required at the highest
level. Substitute modules are included as part of the
condonement allowance, even if they are passed at the
normal pass mark.
44
Doctor of Clinical Dentistry
(DClinDent)
8
540
7-8
30
510
Maximum of 30 credits at level 7
No condoned fails
45
AWARD
This section explains how a degree, diploma or certificate (pre-undergraduate, undergraduate or
postgraduate) is awarded following successful completion of a recognised programme of study; how
a programme classification score is calculated using the level and weighting of modules; and the
rules and methods used to determine the final classification of pre-undergraduate, undergraduate
and taught postgraduate awards. This section also outlines the exit awards that are available to
students who fail to meet the requirements for award on the programme for which they registered
but who have completed a meaningful period of study and have satisfied the examiners that they
have met learning outcomes. Exit awards must adhere to the College’s agreed standard level of
learning outcomes as detailed in the Quality Assurance Handbook. The grounds for revocation of an
award are included in this section.
Conferment
5.40.
Academic Board has the authority to award and revoke any degree, diploma, certificate
or other award granted by the university in accordance with the Charter and Statutes of
King’s College London. Assessment Sub-Boards, the Research Degrees Examination Board
and the Academic Standards Sub-Committee are the sole bodies with delegated authority
to recommend the conferment of the awards for which they are responsible.
5.41.
For awards made by the College, the date of award is the first of the month following
ratification at an Assessment Sub-Board. The date of award may be different for joint,
double or dual awards.
5.42.
Except under the provisions of an academic appeal, no decision of a properly convened
and constituted Assessment Sub-Board acting within its terms of reference and within
the regulations governing the degree may be modified.
5.43.
There are no exceptions to the award rules. Boundaries cannot be lowered, and
exceptions cannot be made.
Classification of Awards
5.44.
For the following programmes,
• Three-year and four-year honours programmes (including those with a semester
or year abroad)
• Integrated Masters
• One-year honours programmes
awards are classified as follows:
70-100 inclusive First-Class Honours
60-69 inclusive Upper Second-Class Honours
50-59 inclusive Lower Second-Class Honours
40-49 inclusive Third-Class Honours
0-39 inclusive Academic Fail
5.45.
The BDS and MB BS are awarded without classification.
a. Students who satisfy the examiners with distinction in specific parts of the BDS
programme may be awarded a BDS with honours.
46
b. Within MB BS, a Merit is available at each stage and Distinctions are available for
the programme as described in the MB BS marking scheme.
5.46.
For the following programmes,
• Masters degrees (excluding integrated masters),
• Postgraduate Diplomas and Postgraduate Certificates (except PGCE, which is
unclassified)
awards are classified as follows:
70-100 inclusive Pass with Distinction
60-69 inclusive Pass with Merit
50-59 inclusive Pass
0-49 inclusive Academic Fail
5.47.
For the following programmes,
• Undergraduate Certificates, Undergraduate Diplomas, Graduate Certificates,
Graduate Diplomas and Foundation degrees
awards are classified as follows:
70-100 inclusive Pass with Distinction
60-69 inclusive Pass with Merit
40-59 inclusive Pass
0-39 inclusive Academic Fail
General Award Rules
5.48.
Module marks shall be rounded up (≥ 0.5) or rounded down (<0.5) to the nearest integer.
The final overall degree classification score shall be rounded up (≥ 0.5) or rounded down
(<0.5) to the nearest integer before the final classification of the award is made.
Pre-undergraduate
5.49.
To qualify for a pre-undergraduate award, students must achieve:
• an overall classification score of 40 or greater for the entire programme; and
• a pass mark in all core modules; and
• a pass mark of 40 in two of the three non-core modules.
Undergraduate Degrees, including Integrated Masters but excluding MB BS and BDS
5.50.
To qualify for a pre-undergraduate or undergraduate degree award, students must
achieve an overall classification score of 40 or greater for the entire programme.
5.51.
Module levels will normally be aligned to the year of study. Exceptions may apply to
optional modules and details will be included in the programme specification.
5.52.
Modules will be weighted in the degree algorithm according to the year a student
registers on the module, rather than to the module level. For example, if level 6 modules
are taken in year two, they will be weighted 2 and if taken in year three they will be
weighted 3 in the final classification.
5.53.
The module weighting of substitute modules will be the year of the initial registration on
the module that has been replaced, rather than the year the substitute module was
taken, if different.
47
5.54.
The marks from modules taken in the first year will not be used to calculate the final
degree classification score. Unless credit only has been awarded, the marks achieved
from modules taken in year two and above will be included in the calculation. This will
include marks for any modules taken over and above the minimum required for award,
up to the maximum permitted, except those taken on a standalone basis. Where credit
has been awarded for a module with a mark in the condonable range, the final module
mark will be the highest overall mark achieved.
5.55.
For students who achieve a Third-Class Honours or above and who fall within 2 per cent
of a higher classification band (68/58/48), an upgrade will be applied automatically on
condition that students have achieved a higher classification in at least 60 credits at level
6 or above in their final year.
5.56.
For students on integrated masters programmes who achieve a Third-Class Honours or
above and who fall within 2 per cent of a higher classification band (68/58/48), an
upgrade will be applied automatically on condition that students have achieved a higher
classification in at least 60 credits at level 7 in their final year.
Masters degrees (excluding Integrated Masters)
5.57.
To qualify for award, students require:
• an overall average of at least 50 with no module mark below 40; and
• a mark of at least 50 in 150 credits (300 credits for MClinDent) including the
dissertation, and a mark of at least 40 in the remainder.
Regulations on marking (4.33-4.48) and condonement (5.8-5.16) apply and should be
read in conjunction with these regulations.
Credit Transfer and Mark Translation
5.58.
A faculty may grant credit where it is permitted or required for students to spend part of
their programme of study taking modules taught and assessed by another higher
education institution, or an organisation relevant and suitable to the field of study, under
the following conditions:
a. that the institution and programme of study have been approved for the purpose
under the procedures established by the relevant committee of the Academic
Board;
b. that the study carried out is necessary for the fulfilment of the objectives of the
programme of study to which it will contribute;
c. that satisfactory arrangements for the assessment of the student’s performance
while attending the institution have been reviewed by the appropriate
Assessment Board on an annual basis;
d. that all mark translation and grade point matrix schemes are approved by the
Academic Standards Sub-Committee every three years.
5.59.
The aggregate period of study spent elsewhere shall be determined by the faculty in
which the students are registered and detailed in the programme specification, provided
that, for students following a full-time programme of study for an undergraduate degree,
the minimum duration of the period of study on modules taught and assessed by the
48
university shall be at least two years. This excludes intercollegiate study completed at
University of London Colleges.
5.60.
The relevant Assessment Sub-Board shall ratify the results in respect of the period of
study spent elsewhere providing that:
a. the conditions given above are satisfied;
b. the credit granted and results recommended are in accordance with the relevant
programme regulations and Assessment Board marking schemes; and
c. for an undergraduate degree, the maximum credit granted will not exceed 120
credits in value.
Intercollegiate modules taken at other University of London Colleges
5.61.
Students taking intercollegiate modules at other University of London Colleges can
transfer marks and credits. The marks for level 5-7 modules will be assigned a credit
value and level by the relevant Faculty Education Committee and will contribute to the
degree classification score. Where an intercollegiate module has been assessed using a
grade point matrix scheme, a mapping document will be required and is subject to
approval by the Academic Standards Sub-Committee.
Study Abroad modules or modules that are taken at institutions that are not University of London
Colleges
5.62.
Students taking level 4-5 modules can transfer credits only.
Exception: BA European Studies (approved by College Academic Standards Committee
May 2014).
5.63.
Students taking level 6-7 modules can transfer marks and credits on condition that a
mark translation scheme has been approved by the Academic Standards Sub-Committee.
The marks will contribute to the degree algorithm.
Modules taken at another Institution as part of a collaborative programme leading to a Joint,
Double or Dual Award
5.64.
Students taking modules as part of a programme that leads to a Joint, Double or Dual
Award can transfer marks and credits that contribute to the degree classification score,
on condition that a mark translation scheme has been approved by the Academic
Standards Sub-Committee at the outset and included in the Memorandum of Agreement.
Transfer of registration to King’s College London
5.65.
Students who have transferred onto a programme from another institution transfer
credits only and the student's classification is based entirely upon performance in
modules assessed by the College. For an award to be made, a minimum of one third of
the programme must be taken at King’s.
Award Algorithm
5.66.
For bachelor and integrated masters degrees, the following algorithm is used to calculate
the final classification score for the award:
Classification
Score =
the sum of the weighted marks [mark 𝑥 relevant credit volume 𝑥
weight]
the sum of credit volume 𝑥 weighting
49
Programme
Weighting
The award classification score is calculated as follows:
Three-year honours degrees,
including programmes with a
semester abroad
• Bachelor of Arts (BA)
• Bachelor of Science (BSc)
• Bachelor of Engineering
(BEng)
• Bachelor of Laws (LLB)
• Bachelor of Music (BMus)
• Bachelor of Science
(Engineering) (BSc (Eng))
0:2:3
• The marks for all credits taken in year one will be given a weighting of 0.
• The marks for all credits taken in year two will be given a weighting of 2.
• The marks for all credits taken in year three will be given a weighting of 3.
• Where students take a semester abroad as part of their degree, any marks obtained will be given a
weighting of 0. Only the marks gained from modules taken at King’s will be included.
Distinctions in oral languages are offered on some programmes where the criteria have been met. Details
will be included in the programme specification.
Four-year honours with a
semester/full year abroad or
year industry
• Bachelor of Arts (BA)
• Bachelor of Science (BSc)
Details of the scheme that
applies to four-year LLB
degrees can be found in the
programme specification.
0:2:0:3
• The marks for all credits taken in year one will be given a weighting of 0.
• Students may take their year abroad or year in industry in year two or year three. Any marks obtained
from the year abroad or year industry will be given a weighting of 0. Only the marks gained from
modules taken at King’s will be included.
• The marks for all credits taken at King’s in either year two or three will be given a weighting of 2.
• The marks for all credits taken in year four will be given a weighting of 3.
Integrated Masters
• Master of Engineering
(MEng)
• Master of Pharmacy
(MPharm)
• Master in Science (MSci)
0:2:3:4
• The marks for all credits taken in year one will be given a weighting of 0.
• The marks for all credits taken in year two will be given a weighting of 2.
• The marks for all credits taken in year three will be given a weighting of 3.
• The marks for all credits taken in year four will be given a weighting of 4.
For Integrated Masters degrees, individual programme specifications will detail any alternative level 7
weightings agreed by the Academic Standards Sub-Committee.
50
Four-year Integrated Masters
with a semester abroad (MSci)
• 4-year Master in Science
(MSci)
0:2:3:4
• The marks for all credits taken in year one will be given a weighting of 0.
• The marks for all credits taken in year two will be given a weighting of 2.
• The marks for all credits taken in year three will be given a weighting of 3.
• The marks for all credits taken in year four will be given a weighting of 4.
• Where students take a semester abroad as part of their degree, any marks obtained will be given a
weighting of 0. Only the marks gained from modules taken at King’s will be included.
Five-year Integrated Masters
with a year abroad or year in
industry
• Five-year Master in Science
(MSci)
0:2:0:3:4 or
0:2:3:0:4
• The marks for all credits taken in year one will be given a weighting of 0.
• The marks for all credits taken in year two will be given a weighting of 2.
• Students may take their year abroad or year in industry in year three or year four. Any marks obtained
from the year abroad or year industry will be given a weighting of 0. Only the marks gained from
modules taken at King’s will be included.
• The marks for all credits taken at King’s in either year three or four will be given a weighting of 3.
• The marks for all credits taken in year five will be given a weighting of 4.
5.67.
For the following awards, an overall score between 0 – 100 is calculated as follows: the weighted average of all individual module marks where each
module is weighted by its credit volume.
Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MB BS) and Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS).
Students who satisfy the examiners with distinction in specific parts of the BDS programme may be awarded a BDS with honours. Within MB BS a
Merit is available at each stage and Distinctions are available for the programme as described in the MB BS marking scheme.
One-year Honours (intercalated or direct entrants to year three of a programme)
• Bachelor of Science Intercalated (iBSc)
Foundation Certificate
Undergraduate Certificates, Undergraduate Diplomas, Graduate Certificates (including Professional Graduate Certificate in Education), Graduate
Diplomas and Foundation Degrees
51
Masters Degrees (excluding Integrated Masters)
• Master of Arts (MA)
• Master of Business Administration (MBA)
• Master of Clinical Dentistry (MClinDent)
• Master of Laws (LLM)
• Master of Music (MMus)
• Master of Nursing (MNurs)
• Master of Public Health (MPH)
• Master of Research (MRes)
• Master of Science (MSc)
• Master of Teaching and Learning (MTL)
• Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA)
• Executive Master of Public Administration (EMPA)
Postgraduate Diplomas and Postgraduate Certificates (including PGCE)
52
Aegrotat Awards
5.68.
Where a final year undergraduate student has completed the full period of study and is
absent from final year assessments through illness or death, the student may be eligible
for consideration under the aegrotat regulations.
5.69.
An aegrotat award is not required if students have satisfied the requirements for an
award as outlined in the programme specification. The Assessment Sub-Board will
approve the award of the degree with an honours classification. However, the relevant
Assessment Sub-Board will not approve a recommendation for the award of a class of
degree higher than the overall level which the student has achieved in the work
presented.
5.70.
Aegrotat regulations do not apply to the following degrees which have a mandatory
professional practice component:
a. MBBS;
b. BDS;
c. MPharm;
d. BSc Physiotherapy;
e. BSc Nutrition and Dietetics;
f. BSc Dental Therapy and Hygiene; and
g. all Nursing, Midwifery and Specialist Community and Public Health programmes
with/leading to registration.
Qualifying for an aegrotat award
5.71.
If a student fails to satisfy the requirements for the award as outlined in the programme
specification, an application for the award of an aegrotat degree must be submitted by
the student or the student’s representative to the relevant Assessment Sub-Board. This
must be accompanied by a medical certificate or other statement of the grounds on
which it is made, as soon as possible and in any case within six weeks from the last date
of the module assessment to which the application refers.
5.72.
Where an application has been submitted and the Assessment Sub-Board is unable to
recommend the award of a degree with Honours, the Board shall consider whether there
is sufficient evidence to suggest that had the student completed the final assessment in
the normal way, the student would have reached a standard (and completed the
necessary modules) to have qualified for the award. If the Assessment Sub-Board decides
that the student meets the criteria, it will ratify the award. This is known as an aegrotat
degree.
5.73.
If an Assessment Sub-Board decides that the student does not meet the criteria for an
Aegrotat Degree, it will consider the student for any relevant exit awards.
5.74.
An Assessment Sub-Board will ratify an award of an Aegrotat degree where eligibility has
been demonstrated. Where eligibility is not demonstrated, a relevant exit qualification
will be awarded.
5.75.
Students who have been awarded an Aegrotat degree will not be allowed to re-enter for
the examination for a classified degree.
5.76.
Aegrotat degrees will be awarded without classification.
53
Exit Awards
5.77.
Where a student has failed one or more modules at level 5 or above and has exhausted
all reassessment and condonement opportunities, or where a student has terminated
their studies early, an exit award will be available under the conditions specified below,
unless an exemption to the exit award provision has been granted.
Exception to Regulation 5.77: For undergraduate programmes and MA Comparative
Health Law, the School of Law has an exemption from the requirement to award exit
awards.
5.78.
An Assessment Board may request an exemption to the requirement to award exit
awards. All such requests must be approved by the Academic Standards Sub-Committee
and must be applied consistently across the whole faculty. Programme specifications will
provide full details of the exit awards available. The following exit awards are not
classified:
a. awards at level 4
b. awards at level 5
c. Ordinary Degrees
d. Dental Studies BSc
e. Medical Science BSc
5.79.
Exit awards at level 6 and 7 will be awarded with classification where students have
satisfied the requirements for such an award. Where the credit accumulated exceeds the
requisite amount for the exit award being conferred only the credits with the best marks
that make up the required amount will be selected to calculate the overall average.
5.80.
Exit awards at levels 4 and 5, level 6 for an Ordinary Degree and level 7 for a
Postgraduate Certificate or Postgraduate Diploma must adhere to the College’s agreed
standard level of learning outcomes as detailed in the Quality Assurance Handbook.
Those exit awards that are outside of this remit must have programme defined learning
outcomes.
5.81.
The following credit table should be used for exit awards of King’s College London:
Award
FHEQ
Level
Minimum
credit
required
for award
Range
of
credit
levels
Maximum
credit at
lowest
level
Minimum
credits at
highest
level
Additional rules
Undergraduate
Certificate
UGCert
4
120
4 and
above
120
NA
No compensated credit
Undergraduate
Diploma
UGDip
5
240
4 and
above
120
90 at level
5 and
above
Compensation: Modules
worth 30 credits at level 4
Condonement: Modules
worth 15 credits at level 5
or above
Ordinary Degree
BA, BSc, BEng.
BSc (Eng), BMus
6
300
4 and
above
120
60 at level
6 and
above
Dental Studies
BSc
6
450
5-6
120
330
All credit to be passed
with a mark of 50
Medical Science
BSc
6
405
4-6
180
165
All core credit to be
passed with a mark of 50.
All non-core to be passed
with a mark of 40
54
5.82.
The title of an exit award must reflect the pattern of study completed successfully and
must follow the naming conventions as set out in the King’s College London Quality
Assurance Handbook.
Posthumous Awards
5.83.
Based on the credits attained, the highest-level exit award or an Aegrotat may be
awarded posthumously.
Certificates and Transcripts
5.84.
Certificates state the name of the College, the qualification, the classification (where
appropriate), the field of study (where appropriate), the name of the student, and the
signatures of the Principal & President and the Chair of Council.
5.85.
All modules, credits and marks (where appropriate) will appear on the student’s record
and transcript, including those taken on a standalone basis.
Revocation
5.86.
Award type, award title or classification can be revoked and reissued, or an award can be
revoked in its entirety under the following conditions:
a. when there is satisfactory proof that there was an administrative error in the
award made;
b. when, subsequent to award, an Assessment Sub-Board takes into account
information which was unavailable at the time its original decision was made;
c. following a recommendation or ruling by the Misconduct Committee;
d. following a recommendation or ruling by an Inquiry Panel established to
investigate allegations of research misconduct;
e. where students have completed a programme at the university and wish to join
the next level of the programme within two years (see regulations on Recognition
of Prior Learning in Chapter 1).
Policies and Procedures
Marking, College Framework
Postgraduate Taught Students, Core Code of Practice
Quality Assurance Handbook
Integrated Masters Programmes Policy
Academic Misconduct Policy and Procedure
Useful Links
Programme Specifications
Faculties and Departments
Student Services Online
Assessment Boards, Assessment Sub-Boards and External Examiners
Glossary
55
CHAPTER 6: FRAMEWORK FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH
AWARDS
The Regulations for Research Degrees apply to all students registered on research degree
programmes at the university. For research degree programmes with taught elements, the
Regulations for Taught Programmes will also apply. This section contains regulations on the
following:
6.1. Research Degree Awards (programmes offered and criteria)
6.2. Registration
6.3. Minimum and maximum periods of registration
6.4. Collaborative Programmes and Off-Campus Study
6.5. Arrangements for off-campus study
6.6. Working and teaching during a research degree
6.7. Supervision
6.8. Progression
6.9. Extending and exceeding
6.10.Interruption of study
6.11.Examination entry requirements
6.12.Examinations
6.13.Examination Outcomes
These regulations are reviewed annually by the Centre for Doctoral Studies.
6.1. Research Degree Awards (programmes offered and criteria)
6.1.1.
A research degree programme incorporates a substantial research component
which is carried out during the period of registration, and which results in the
submission of a thesis for examination. The university offers the following
research degree programmes:
Level 7 – Research Degrees
• Master of Philosophy (MPhil)
• Master in Philosophical Studies (MPhilStud)
Level 8 – Research Degrees
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
• Doctor in Health Care (DHC)
• Doctor in Theology and Ministry (DThM)
• Doctor in Professional Studies (DrPS)
• Doctor of Medicine (Research) (MD(Res))
• Doctor in Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy)
• Doctor of Medicine (MD)
• Doctor in Education (EdD) (not currently offered)
• Doctor of Ministry (DMin) (not currently offered)
Criteria for the award of MPhil
6.1.2.
The MPhil degree shall be assessed by a thesis submitted by the student against
the relevant criteria listed below and by an oral examination. The thesis shall:
56
a. consist of the student’s own account of their investigations, the greater
proportion of which shall have been undertaken by the student during the
period of registration under supervision for the degree;
b. be either a record of original work or of an ordered and critical explanation
of existing knowledge and shall provide evidence that the field has been
surveyed thoroughly;
c. be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument;
d. give a critical assessment of the relevant literature, describe the method of
research and its findings and include a discussion on those findings;
e. include a full bibliography and references;
f. be written in English and be of satisfactory literary presentation; and
g. not exceed 60,000 words (inclusive of footnotes but exclusive of appendices
and bibliography, the word limit not applying to editions of a text or texts),
unless the thesis has previously been submitted and examined for a PhD
and judged to be of MPhil standard regardless of when the student first
registered; and
h. where ethical approval is required, indicate that such approval has been
granted by the appropriate body.
Additional requirements for programmes with a practice-based component
6.1.3.
For research with a practice-based, a student may submit, as part of a thesis, a
practice component which meets the requirements of the examiners, and which
has been produced specifically for the degree. This may take the format, for
example, of a portfolio of compositions, performance materials, artworks, digital
materials, literary texts or translations, which will exemplify and illustrate the ideas
contained in the written part of the thesis. The practical component must
demonstrate a publishable or exhibitable standard of originality and
accomplishment as determined by the examiners, who will include those qualified
in academic research as well as in the evaluation of the relevant field of creative
practice. It must be presented in a form easily available to the examiners, whether
as audio-visual recordings, printed texts, digital media or another suitable format.
A photographic exhibition or projection of film may also be acceptable. In this case
the practical component shall be accompanied by a written textual component, as
determined by the specific subject programme.
6.1.4.
The written component will include as appropriate an exposition of the research
question(s), aims and concerns that generated the practical work, a
methodological discussion framing and justifying its approach, format and
presentation, and a critical discussion to demonstrate that the student is well
acquainted with the disciplinary field in which he or she is working, and is able
independently to analyse, interpret and evaluate debates and theoretical positions
associated with it. However presented, the practical component must be
accompanied by an adequate and approved form of retainable documentation,
and the entire thesis, comprising textual and practice components, shall not
57
exceed 100,000 words. In all cases, the submitted material must together fulfil the
criteria for the PhD or MPhil set out above.
Criteria for the award of MPhil Stud
6.1.5.
The assessment for the MPhil Stud degree is in two parts: the assessment of the
taught components and the assessment of the thesis. Students are required to
pass both parts but may undertake the research and taught components
concurrently. The thesis shall:
a. consist of the student’s own account of their investigations, the greater
proportion of which shall have been undertaken by the student during the
period of registration;
b. be either a record of original work or an ordered and critical explanation of
existing knowledge and shall provide evidence that the field has been
surveyed thoroughly;
c. be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument;
d. give a critical assessment of the relevant literature, present the findings of
research and include a discussion on those findings;
e. be written in English and with a satisfactory literary presentation;
f. not exceed 30,000 words (inclusive of footnotes but exclusive of appendices
and bibliography, the word limit not applying to editions of a text or texts);
and
g. where ethical approval is required, indicate that such approval has been
granted by the appropriate body.
Criteria for the award of PhD
6.1.6.
The PhD degree shall be assessed by a thesis submitted by the student against the
relevant criteria listed below and by an oral examination. The thesis shall:
a. consist of the student’s own account of their investigations, the greater
proportion of which shall have been undertaken by the student during the
period of registration under supervision for the degree;
b. form a distinct contribution to the knowledge of the subject and afford
evidence of originality by the discovery of new facts and/or by the exercise
of independent critical power;
c. be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument;
d. give a critical assessment of the relevant literature, describe the method of
research and its findings, include discussion on those findings and indicate
in what respects they appear to the student to advance the study of the
subject;
58
e. and, in so doing, demonstrate a deep and synoptic understanding of the
field of study, (the student being able to place the thesis in a wider context),
objectivity and the capacity for judgment in complex situations and
autonomous work in that field;
f. be written in English and be of satisfactory literary presentation;
g. not exceed 100,000 words (inclusive of footnotes but exclusive of
appendices and bibliography, the word limit not applying to editions of a
text or texts);
h. include a full bibliography and references;
i. demonstrate research skills relevant to the thesis being presented;
j. be of a standard to merit publication in whole or in part or in a revised form
(for example, as a monograph or as a number of articles in learned
journals); and
k. where ethical approval is required, indicate that such approval has been
granted by the appropriate body.
Criteria for the award of MD(Res)
6.1.7.
The MD(Res) degree shall be assessed by a thesis submitted by the student against
the relevant criteria listed below and by an oral examination. The thesis shall:
a. deal with any branch of medicine, or surgery or medical science;
b. consist of the student’s own account of their investigations, the greater
proportion of which shall have been undertaken by the student during the
period of registration under supervision for the degree;
c. form a distinct contribution to the knowledge of the subject and afford
evidence of originality by the discovery of new facts and/or by the exercise
of independent critical power;
d. be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument;
e. give a critical assessment of the relevant literature, describe the method of
research and its findings, include discussion on those findings and indicate
in what respects they appear to the student to advance the study of the
subject; and, in so doing, demonstrate a deep and synoptic understanding
of the field of study (the student being able to place the thesis in a wider
context), objectivity and the capacity for judgment in complex situations
and autonomous work in that field;
f. be written in English and with a satisfactory literary presentation;
g. not exceed 50,000 words (inclusive of footnotes but exclusive of appendices
and bibliography, the word limit not applying to editions of a text or texts);
59
h. include a full bibliography and references;
i. demonstrate research skills relevant to the thesis being presented;
j. be of a standard to merit publication in whole or in part or in a revised form
(for example, as a monograph or as a number of articles in learned
journals); and
k. where ethical approval is required, indicate that such approval has been
granted by the appropriate body.
Criteria for the award of Professional Doctorates
6.1.8.
The taught and practical elements shall be assessed by methods and at an
intellectual level and at a time appropriate to the programme. Such assessment
shall involve at least one examiner external to the university.
6.1.9.
Unless stated otherwise in the programme specification, a student should meet
the requirements of the examiners in all elements of the taught and practical
assessment before being permitted to submit the thesis for examination.
6.1.10.
The scope of the thesis shall be what might reasonably be expected after three or
at most four years of full-time study, or after six or at most seven years of part-
time study. It shall:
a. be appropriate to the subject concerned, having regard to the other
formally assessed elements for the degree;
b. consist of the student’s own account of their investigations and must
indicate in what respects they appear to the student to advance the study of
the subject;
c. form a distinct contribution to the knowledge of the subject and afford
evidence of originality by the discovery of new facts and/or by the exercise
of independent critical power;
d. be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument;
e. be at least 25,000 words in length and not exceed 55,000 words (inclusive of
footnotes but exclusive of appendices and bibliography, the word limit not
applying to editions of a text or texts);
f. be written in English and with a satisfactory literary presentation;
g. include a full bibliography and references;
h. demonstrate research skills relevant to the thesis being presented;
i. be of a standard to merit publication in whole or in part or in a revised form
(for example, as a monograph or as a number of articles in learned
journals); and
60
j. where ethical approval is required, indicate that such approval has been
granted by the appropriate body.
Funded students
6.1.11.
Students in receipt of externally funded studentships may have to adhere to
funder’s requirements which override university regulations.
6.1.12.
The student’s acceptance of the offer of funding and the terms and conditions of
the funding will be taken as proof that the student accepts these requirements.
The main funders’ additional requirements will be clarified in the offer letter or
supporting documentation.
6.1.13.
Any student who received funding as part of their degree but who is in an
unfunded period, such as pending submission, will still be considered a funded
student and funder’s regulations will continue to apply until completion of the
degree.
6.2. Registration
6.2.1.
Except as provided for under the regulations on Collaborative research degrees
and Off-campus study for research degrees, students will centre their academic
activities on the university and attend at such times as the university or faculty
might require.
6.2.2.
In addition to the general entrance requirements specified in Chapter 1:
Admissions, the following research programme-specific registration requirements
apply.
6.2.3.
The minimum entrance qualification is an Upper Second-Class Honours degree in a
relevant subject, or an equivalent overseas qualification obtained after at least
three years study. Any additional requirements will be detailed in the online
prospectus.
6.2.4.
Students who do not meet the minimum entrance requirements may be admitted
if they hold an alternative qualification of an equivalent or higher level in a
relevant subject or can prove relevant professional experience which satisfies the
Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies in the faculty of registration that the applicant
can follow and complete the programme.
6.2.5.
To be eligible for registration for the MD(Res) degree, an applicant must have
obtained the MBBS degree or another registrable primary qualification in Medicine
from a higher education institution and be eligible for full registration or hold
limited registration with the General Medical Council.
6.2.6.
It is the responsibility of the faculties to have transparent selection procedures in
place to accept students onto postgraduate research programmes. Following an
initial screening, selection will be by interview either face to face or by another
communication method as deemed appropriate by the faculty. Offers for a place
can then only be made by the appropriate authority within the faculty and via an
offer letter from the Postgraduate Admissions office.
61
Advanced Standing
6.2.7.
With the approval of the relevant faculty, a student who is exceptionally well
qualified may be permitted to register for the PhD without first registering for the
MPhil. In such cases, the programme of study followed may not be less than two
years of full-time or four years of part-time study.
Transfer
6.2.8.
Where a student has started an Mphil of PhD degree (or equivalent) at another
university or from another department within the university, a faculty may have
procedures in place to register the student for the Mphil or PhD degree with
exemption from part of the programme of study already completed.
6.2.9.
Registration for the degree to which transfer has been made should normally date
from initial registration for the original degree, although this may be varied in
exceptional circumstances on the approval of the faculty.
6.2.10.
The period of time at the university following the transfer has to be at least one
calendar year for full-time students or two years for part-time students. Students
who have completed their research and have submitted their thesis for
examination may not transfer.
6.2.11.
A student may transfer from the MphilStud, the MD(Res) or a professional
doctorate programme to the Mphil/PhD programme or vice versa with exemption
from part of the programme of study already completed, subject to any
requirements that may be set out by the faculty.
6.2.12.
Students must adhere to the university’s regulations on Research Ethics and
Research Misconduct.
6.2.13.
Academic Regulations and programme specifications in force when a student
registers will normally apply to that student until completion of the programme.
Academic Policies are subject to regular review and updated versions apply
irrespective of the year of a student’s registration.
Registration Status
6.2.14.
For students registered for a research degree at university, there are five types of
registration:
a. full-time;
b. part-time;
c. part-time non-resident;
d. pending submission (with access to library and computer facilities and
supervision);
e. submitted (with access to library and computer facilities, and supervision).
6.2.15.
The university may advise a student to enrol on part-time study where it is
considered that the student’s personal circumstances may hinder their ability to
meet the requirements of a full-time programme. Examples of when this might be
appropriate include but are not limited to:
62
• students engaged in earning their own livelihood who provide evidence
from their employer to that effect at registration;
• students who are registered as unemployed;
• students who are acting as a full-time carer for a spouse or family member;
• students registered as internal postgraduate research students who are also
employed as a member of staff of the university.
6.2.16.
Full-time students are expected to spend 35 hours per week on their research
degree on average throughout the year, apart from when on annual leave. Part-
time students are expected to spend 17.5 hours per week on their research degree
on average throughout the year apart from when on annual leave.
6.2.17.
Students will be allowed to change mode of study from full-time to part-time or
vice versa only once during their period of study unless this is a funder’s
requirement.
6.2.18.
Students are not permitted to transfer mode of attendance in the final year
leading up to their submission deadline.
6.2.19.
Whether a student is full-time or part-time, they are entitled to annual leave of a
minimum of 20 and up to a maximum of 40 working days per year, inclusive of
public holidays and university closure dates. Students must agree their annual
leave in advance with their supervisor. Excessive absences should be reported to
the faculty via normal progress report procedures.
6.2.20.
Some restrictions may apply to periods of leave for students holding international
visas to study in the UK. These students may be under obligation to report annual
leave periods to the Visa Compliance team for monitoring purposes, as defined by
Home Office.
6.3. Minimum and maximum periods of registration
6.3.1.
Students must adhere to the minimum and maximum periods of registration for
the degree they undertake.
Duration of programme
6.3.2.
Expected and required submission deadlines will be set out as part of the
admissions offer letter and/or confirmed upon enrolment.
6.3.3.
Students are expected to submit their thesis within the following timescales:
a. for the PhD programme: within three years of full-time or six years of part-
time registration;
b. for the MD(Res) degree: within two years of full-time or four years of part-
time registration;
c. for the MPhilStud: within two years of full-time or four years of part-time
registration;
63
d. for professional doctorates: within three years of full-time or six years of
part-time registration.
6.3.4.
Excluding any period of interruption, students are required to submit their thesis
within the following timescales:
Type of Degree
Mode of
Study
Minimum submission
period
Maximum submission
period
PhD
Full-time
2 years (24 months)
4 years (48 months)
PhD
Part-time
4 years (48 months)
7 years (84 months)
MPhil
Full-time
2 years (24 months)
3 years (36 months)
MPhil
Part-time
4 years (48 months)
5 years (60 months)
MDRes
Full-time
2 years (24 months)
3 years (36 months)
MDRes
Part-time
4 years (48 months)
5 years (60 months)
MPhilStud
Full-time
2 years (24 months)
2 years (24 months)
MPhilStud
Part-time
4 years (48 months)
4 years (48 months)
Professional
Doctorate
Full-time
2 years (24 months)
4 years (48 months)
Professional
Doctorate
Part-time
4 years (48 months)
7 years (84 months)
6.3.5.
For Professional Doctorates a period of study as defined in the programme
specification must be spent on the taught elements of the programme.
6.3.6.
Where a student fails to submit within the required timeframe as set out above
and an exemption request has not been granted to extend or exceed their
submission deadline, the student will be classed as having failed to meet the
requirements of the programme. Students will have the opportunity to appeal
against this outcome in accordance with section 6.15 on academic appeals for
research degrees.
6.4. Collaborative research degrees and Off-campus study
6.4.1.
Students on joint, split-site or non-resident MPhil/PhD programmes must comply
with the normal King's College London Regulations, with the exceptions listed
below.
Joint PhD programmes
6.4.2.
For joint PhD programmes run in collaboration between King’s College London and
a partner institution, leading to a jointly awarded qualification, admission is run in
collaboration between the institutions and approval must be received from both i
before an offer can be made.
6.4.3.
Students are required to:
a. select a home institution at the application stage, where they will start and
end their programme;
64
b. spend a specified minimum period of time at the partner institution during
the course of their studies;
c. enrol at both institutions and re-enrol each year throughout their
programme;
d. provide details of their travel plan at the application stage. Any changes to
this must be discussed with supervisors and approved by both institutions;
e. follow the procedures for ethical approval set out by the Research Ethics
Office of the Home institution. If a student intends to conduct research
requiring ethical approval in the country of the partner institution, approval
must also be gained from that institution according to its procedures;
f. refer requests for changes to registration status to both institutions, usually
via supervisors in the first instance;
g. meet the examination and upgrade requirements of their home institution.
Any King’s-home students who do not upgrade to PhD may be awarded an
MPhil, but this will be awarded solely by King’s College London;
h. submit final copies of their thesis to both institutions. Students should check
with the partner institution for confirmation of the number of copies
required and method of submission.
6.4.4.
Students must have supervisors based in both institutions who will work together
to monitor progress, though the majority of the administration will be managed by
the home institution.
6.4.5.
The progress of students on joint PhD programmes will be monitored according to
the procedures of the home institution. In some cases, students may also be
required to completed progress reports whilst at the partner institution.
6.4.6.
Examination is usually by a panel of at least three examiners. This will normally
take place at the home institution and may involve the use of video conferencing.
6.4.7.
Students on joint PhD programmes who wish to make a complaint will normally do
so through the process of the institution where they are resident at the time, in so
far as the complaint relates to their study at that particular university. Students
who wish to make an appeal in respect of academic progress or concerning a
decision of the examiners will do so by using the procedures of the designated
home institution.
Split-site MPhil/PhD programmes
6.4.8.
The minimum period of residence in the UK for students on a split-site MPhil/PhD
programme will depend on the agreement between their Research Institution and
their faculty at King's, but will normally involve periods at induction, upgrade,
submission and oral examination.
65
6.4.9.
Students on split-site programmes must have supervisors based in both
institutions. The external supervisor will need to be approved by the faculty at
King’s where the student is based, using their normal procedures.
6.4.10.
Supervisors should work together to monitor progress and comply with normal
university processes and procedures for documenting this.
Public Research Institutions and Industrial Laboratories (MPhil/PhD programmes only)
6.4.11.
A person engaged in research in a non-degree awarding, government or other
public research institution or in an industrial research laboratory is eligible to apply
for registration as a non-resident student of the university for the degrees of MPhil
or PhD. The student must demonstrate to the faculty that they are following a
prescribed programme of study appropriate to lead towards the award and, if
accepted, will carry out the major part or the whole of their research for the
degree at the research centre concerned, subject to the conditions below. The
nature of the programme offered by the institute or laboratory will determine the
appropriate mode of registration.
6.4.12.
The application for registration as a part-time or full-time non-resident student
must have the support of the authorities of the institution or laboratory at which
the research is conducted, who shall confirm that:
a. the student will be able to attend the faculty for the prescribed programme
of study;
b. no additional restriction will be placed upon presentation for examination of
the thesis;
c. a successful thesis shall be made available in accordance with the academic
regulations;
d. except where these regulations make specific provision, the student will be
required to comply with all relevant academic regulations both generally
and those relating to progression, the transfer of registration from MPhil to
PhD degree, and transfer pending submission status specifically. If the
institution or laboratory at which the research is conducted has progression
monitoring procedures that the faculty of registration considers are
appropriate, these procedures may be used in place of the university
procedures.
6.4.13.
The prescribed programme of study should include elements requiring formal
participation by the student, such as attendance at university lectures, tutorials,
seminars, training sessions and appropriate consultation with the university
supervisor.
6.4.14.
The prescribed programme of study shall be carried out under the primary
supervision of an external supervisor at the institution or laboratory at which the
student is based. A second supervisor shall be appointed from an appropriate
department at the university. The external supervisor must be eligible to act in
accordance with the supervision regulations and must maintain close contact with
the university supervisor in regard to the general strategy of the research and, in
66
order that the student may acquire background knowledge and skills relevant to
their research.
6.4.15.
Students will normally have joint face-to-face meetings with both supervisors at
least twice a year and monthly contact with the university supervisor. It is also
expected that the external supervisor will ensure regular contact with the
department at which the student is registered.
6.4.16.
Where a student ceases to work at the centre for which their registration has been
approved, their registration as a student for the MPhil/PhD degree shall cease at
the same time. Where the new place of employment also meets the requirements
for registration under these regulations the student may apply to the faculty at
which they are registered for transfer of registration. The faculty shall inform the
Student Administrative Services of any change in the place of research.
6.5. Arrangements for off-campus study
6.5.1.
A student must centre their academic activities on the faculty of registration for a
period of at least six months, of which defined periods of attendance must be;
a. at the beginning of the period of registration, including at induction;
b. at the period of upgrade; and
c. immediately before the submission of the thesis and any other times
specified by the faculty.
Separate regulations and procedures govern students registered under
collaborative research degree programmes.
6.5.2.
The responsible authority within the faculty is the chair of the faculty PGR
committee/Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies. They should establish that it is in
the interests of the student’s work that they should spend a period of study off-
campus and that:
a. the institution or place in which the student proposes to study is suitable in
terms of the facilities and academic supervision available;
b. the institution is willing to provide the necessary facilities and supervision;
and
c. the student will be adequately insured.
6.5.3.
A student may be permitted to spend part of their programme in off-campus study
under the following conditions. Additional requirements will be outlined by the
respective faculty:
a. Prior permission to study off-campus is obtained by the student from the
faculty;
67
b. A plan for monitoring the off-campus study is agreed with the student by
the responsible authority before any period of off-campus study is
undertaken;
c. The conditions set by the faculty ensure that the regulatory requirements of
the university regarding attendance and programme of study are met;
d. Regular contact with the supervisors is maintained;
6.5.4.
Students not based in the UK for the duration of their programme must ensure
that:
a. prior to registration, permission is obtained by the student from the
responsible authority within the faculty;
b. a plan for monitoring the study progress is agreed with the student by the
responsible authority by the first formal progress report sign-off.
6.5.5.
The arrangements for monitoring the progress of the student will include the
appointment of a local supervisor, who will supervise the student on a day-to-day
basis, and maintain frequent contact with the student’s first supervisor at King’s. In
addition to this it is expected that formal monitoring will continue to take place in
line with normal procedures.
6.5.6.
Any student wishing to spend less than the six months required at the faculty of
registration must gain the permission of their faculty, in order that an exemption
to the regulations can be sought from the college.
6.5.7.
Timelines for submission are the same as for students whose studies are centred
at the university and therefore off-campus study will not be permitted as a reason
for late submission.
6.5.8.
A student registered as off-campus will receive a research degree of King’s College
London and not of an external institution, unless they are registered under a
formal collaborative research degree programme for a joint award.
6.5.9.
Students must complete an off-campus study form in accordance with procedures
in the faculty of registration and submit this to the relevant Registry office. Any
changes to the plan must be communicated to the Registry office.
6.6. Working and teaching during a research degree
Working during a research degree
6.6.1.
During the registration period, the priority of a student and supervisor(s) is the
completion of the research degree. However, with the prior approval of the
supervisor, a student may undertake work not directly related to their degree in
their own time.
6.6.2.
It is essential that the supervisor and student ensure that this work is not
detrimental to the studies. If it becomes apparent that a student’s progress is
being affected by additional work then the supervisor should deal with this as a
performance issue.
68
6.6.3.
Where appropriate, full-time students may also undertake one clinical session (not
related to their studies) per week, and/or contribute towards research-related
projects not directly related to their studies. Where it is a condition of a fellowship,
students may be permitted to do up to 0.2 full-time equivalent (FTE) clinical work
to maintain their clinical skills. For craft specialists (e.g. surgeons), this can be
increased to 0.4 FTE.
6.6.4.
Students who are studying on a student visa must comply with the restrictions
placed on
their working hours and if in doubt consult with the Visa Compliance team.
Teaching During a Research Degree
6.6.5.
Students may be given the opportunity, with the approval of the supervisor(s),
to engage in education support by contributing to undergraduate teaching, such
as:
a. lecturing;
b. demonstrating practical classes;
c. project supervision;
d. taking tutorials; and/or
e. being involved in both formative and summative assessment activities for
undergraduate degrees.
6.6.6.
The student’s teaching responsibilities must:
a. clearly defined in writing;
b. be compatible with their research responsibilities;
c. be supported by their supervisor(s); and/or
d. not exceed a maximum of six hours per week on average.
6.6.7.
All students must be provided with appropriate training before commencing any
teaching.
6.6.8.
Students must be fairly paid for any teaching work.
6.6.9.
Research students who engage in education support under the Post-graduate
research students involvement with teaching and learning policy should be
mentored by an academic member of staff and receive feedback on their activities
from the students they have taught.
6.7. Supervision
6.7.1.
Faculties are responsible for arranging the supervision of a research degree
student and will ensure that a supervisory team (a first supervisor and a second
supervisor, or panel of supervisors, is appointed to supervise the research of each
student and that the supervisors have appropriate research experience.
6.7.2.
The roles and responsibilities of the faculty Postgraduate Research Students
Committee, Head of Department/Division, faculty Associate Dean for Doctoral
Studies, supervisors and students are detailed in guidance provided by the Centre
for Doctoral Studies.
69
6.7.3.
Each student will be allocated a provisional first supervisor at the time of offer of a
place. The supervisory team will be confirmed within the first month of
registration.
6.7.4.
For professional doctorate programmes, the appointment of a supervisory team
should take place within three months of the student successfully completing the
taught elements of the programme.
6.7.5.
Students and supervisors are required to read and sign a student-supervisor
agreement within the first month of registration, the format of which may vary.
Please refer to the admitting faculty for relevant details.
6.7.6.
It is the responsibility of Heads of Departments, line managers, and Associate
Deans of Doctoral Studies, or their delegates, to ensure that all supervisors are
aware of the standards of conduct and performance expected of them in the Roles
and responsibilities for PGR supervisors. If the faculty Associate Dean believes
these standards are not being met, the Associate Dean should raise their concerns
with the Heads of Departments, who may escalate the matter further in line with
university HR disciplinary procedures.
6.7.7.
The faculty Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, or their delegate, is responsible
for ensuring that staff who supervise students on research degrees are trained and
informed about the processes of supervision and progression.
6.7.8.
It is the responsibility of the Head of Department with support from the faculty.
Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, or their delegate, to ensure appropriate cover
is provided in case of planned or unplanned absence of the first supervisor of more
than thirty calendar days, for example because of illness; to make new supervisory
arrangements within an appropriate timeframe where it is deemed necessary, and
it is feasible to do so.
6.7.9.
The roles and responsibilities of the Faculty Postgraduate Research Students
Committee, Head of Department/Division, Faculty Associate Dean for Doctoral
Studies, supervisors and students are detailed in guidance provided by the Centre
for Doctoral Studies.
Supervisory Team
6.7.10.
The supervisory team for a research student must consist of a minimum of two:
• a first and second supervisor; or
• co-first supervisors; or
• a panel of supervisors.
6.7.11.
For co-supervision models, both supervisors are considered to be first supervisors.
6.7.12.
To be eligible, supervisors must have obtained a PhD or equivalent degree relevant
to the student/topic in question.
• not be studying for a research degree themselves;
• have completed supervisory development;
70
• attend a formal refresher supervisory development session once every five
years;
• Inform the student and the appropriate authority in the faculty if they are
suddenly unable to perform their duties as supervisor for more than one
month.
In addition, at least one of the student’s supervisors must:
• have an employment contract with the university that extends beyond the
duration of the student’s degree. This includes adjunct appointed clinical
academic staff;
• have supervised a PhD (or equivalent research degree as relevant to the
student in question) to completion.
6.7.13.
The maximum number of students a member of staff may supervise as first
supervisor or co-first supervisor at any one point in time is eight research degree
students (part-time or full-time).
6.7.14.
The maximum number of students a member of staff may supervise as either first,
co-first, second or third supervisor at any one point in time is twenty research
degree students (part-time or full-time).
1
st
supervisor
6.7.15.
The first supervisor role for a research degree student can be undertaken by:
a. a member of academic staff of the university appointed by the faculty;
b. adjunct academic staff who are employed by one of the King’s Health
Partner Trusts;
c. a career development fellow, who has full salary support from a personal
award with 4 years or more duration, including research funding, with an
expectation of leading an independent research programme and equivalent
status to Lecturer or above.
6.7.16.
The first supervisor should have regular supervision meetings with the student
either in person, via video conference or by phone, normally at least once every
month, or part-time equivalent.
2
nd
supervisor
6.7.17.
The second supervisor role for a research degree student can be undertaken by:
a. staff who meet the criteria to act as first supervisor; and
b. external colleagues, with or without honorary academic contract with the
university, who provide external academic expertise and enhance the
research degree through a collaboration with the King’s first supervisor and
student, for example, academic staff in other universities, NHS staff, cultural
leaders such as Head of Collections at British Museum, industrial partners
for iCASE awards, or legal professionals.
71
6.7.18.
The second supervisor should play a clearly defined role in the student’s
supervision and should meet the student at least every three months, or part-time
equivalent, and should be able to act independently of the first supervisor.
6.7.19.
The second supervisor is expected to support the student, to assist in the
monitoring of the student's progress and to stand in in the first supervisor’s
absence. Therefore, in cases where the second supervisor does not meet the
eligibility criteria to act as the first supervisor, the faculty Associate Dean for
Doctoral Studies, or their delegate, will appoint a new first supervisor if the first
supervisor is absent for more than one month.
6.7.20.
Post-doctoral researchers are not normally eligible to act as first or second
supervisor for research degree students. On a case-by-case basis, senior post-
doctoral researchers who meet specific criteria may apply, with the support of
their faculty Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, to be considered for an
exemption to this regulation to act as a second supervisor.
Third Supervisor
6.7.21.
The third supervisor, where appointed, would bring specialist knowledge or
supervisory experience to the research project but is not responsible for
monitoring the academic progression of the student. A third supervisor will be
appointed via the faculty and could include the following:
a. staff who meet the criteria to act as first or second supervisor;
b. members of staff who hold a post-doctoral researcher position;
c. members of staff who hold a teaching fellow position;
d. individuals who are external to the university but can provide expert
knowledge as set in regulation 6.7.17b;
e. individuals who are external to the university but can provide local support
for students who carry out fieldwork abroad or elsewhere in the UK.
6.8. Progression
6.8.1.
All students and members of staff, including supervisors, must comply with, and
have access to, the university’s rules in place for progress monitoring. The rules in
this section represent a minimum level to which all faculties will adhere, although
faculties may choose to implement stricter procedures. For this reason, it is
important that this is read in conjunction with the guidelines set out in the
appropriate faculty and departmental handbooks.
Skills training
6.8.2.
Research project work constitutes the major training component of the
programme. In line with Research Council requirements and QAA
recommendations, students should also demonstrate that they are acquiring
generic skills and skills in research methods.
72
6.8.3.
All research students have the right to undertake the equivalent of 10 days (FTE) of
training and development activities per year of study.
6.8.4.
The development needs for each new student must be assessed individually by
their supervisory teams at the start of the study programme and a training plan
must be agreed between students and supervisors. The training plan should be
reviewed as part of the progress reviews of all students.
6.8.5.
The student’s training record must also be reviewed at the upgrade to PhD stage
and any deficiencies highlighted and addressed.
6.8.6.
Faculties must ensure that students are supported to develop an appropriate
training plan based on their individual development needs, and the activities to fill
these needs can be drawn from workshops run centrally by the Centre for Doctoral
Studies or by other providers within or external to the university.
6.8.7.
Attendance at training sessions run by the Researcher Development Programme
and other training providers at the university will be recorded and students should
use their progress reports to log training undertaken outside of the university.
Regular review of progress
6.8.8.
The progress of all students will be subject to regular, formal review. Progress
reviews, including upgrade reviews, must involve three assessors, at least one of
whom is independent of the student’s supervisory team.
6.8.9.
During their first year of study, both full- and part-time students must have their
progress formally reviewed within three months of initial registration and again
after a further period of nine months registration. Thereafter, the progress of all
students will be reviewed at least every six months.
6.8.10.
A formal progress review will have one of three possible outcomes:
a. Satisfactory progress: the student’s registration is allowed to continue
unconditionally until the next review;
b. Conditional progress: there is cause for concern about the student’s
progress such that continued registration is subject to completing whatever
conditions are set out in writing by the assessing panel prior to a
subsequent follow-up review. This may include cases where the lack of
progress is due to supervision problems; in such cases the assessors should
ensure that steps are taken to resolve those problems as part of the
assessors’ conditions;
c. Unsatisfactory progress: the student has not made the normal academic
progress expected of all students and compulsory removal proceedings will
begin in line with regulations 8.2-8.25. A finding of ‘unsatisfactory progress’
and removal proceedings shall only commence where:
• there has been an earlier finding of ‘conditional progress’ and the
follow-up review determines that the student has failed to make
satisfactory progress; or
73
• the student has otherwise received prior written warning from the
faculty in the manner specified in the regulations on academic
progress.
In the event of removal under regulations 8.2-8.25, the student has a right of
appeal against the termination of their studies.
6.8.11.
Whenever ‘conditional progress’ is recommended the student must undergo a
follow-up progress review to determine whether progress is satisfactory or if the
student should be removed for failure to make the normal academic progress
expected of all students. In the case of first year students undergoing their nine-
month review, this follow-up review must occur before the end of the first year.
For other students the follow-up review must occur no later than six months from
the date of the initial review. The result of any such follow-up review will either
be:
a. Satisfactory progress: the student’s registration is allowed to continue
unconditionally until the next review; or
b. Unsatisfactory progress: the student has not made the normal academic
progress expected of all students and compulsory removal proceedings will
begin under regulations 8.2-8.25. In the event of removal under these
regulations, the student has a right of appeal.
6.8.12.
The result of all progress reviews must be proposed by the student’s first
supervisor and signed off by the PG/research co-ordinator for the subject area via
the university’s online progress monitoring system.
Upgrade from MPhil to PhD
6.8.13.
Unless exceptionally exempted from this requirement, a student following a PhD
programme will initially be registered for the MPhil degree and will be permitted
to upgrade from the MPhil degree to the PhD degree according to the procedures
outlined by the faculty of registration.
6.8.14.
The upgrade from MPhil to PhD registration is classed by the university as a formal
milestone to be satisfactorily attained by students in their progress towards
attaining their PhD. The upgrade does not lead to a qualification in its own right.
6.8.15.
Transfer of registration from the MPhil degree to the PhD degree will be
considered after the student has completed nine months full-time study, or
eighteen months part-time study; but before eighteen months of full-time study,
or thirty-six months part-time study.
6.8.16.
Transfer from MPhil to PhD status must be completed within the above
timeframes. A student will only be allowed to undertake a maximum of two formal
reviews to upgrade. A second attempt at the upgrade, if necessary, plus the
completion of any associated tasks in order to complete the transfer.
6.8.17.
Students must satisfy any conditions prescribed by the faculty of registration
before being considered for upgrade.
74
6.8.18.
The key principle for upgrading is for an academic panel, at least one of whom has
to be independent to the supervisory team, to assess that the student is on course
to produce research of the required standard for the final degree within the
permitted timescale.
6.8.19.
The upgrade from MPhil to PhD will involve the student producing either a
substantial report, draft chapters or other pieces of work, along with:
• a research schedule;
• a clear research question;
• evidence of a clear methodology;
• set of research procedures or framework of inquiry;
• a work plan to completion;
• a record of training and development activities undertaken.
Plus, a formal review meeting must take place to assess the submitted work.
6.8.20.
The upgrade review, including any following reviews, will normally take place in
person with the student physically present. In exceptional circumstances, where a
physical meeting is not possible, alternative arrangements may be agreed by the
faculty in line with university recommendations.
6.8.21.
Where a student is registered for a joint degree with an institution that does not
offer the MPhil degree, or where it is an explicit condition of the funding of a
studentship that a student must register directly for a doctoral degree, the student
will be registered directly onto the PhD degree.
6.8.22.
If it is a funder’s requirement that the student should be registered directly for the
doctoral degree, then the student will still have to go through the upgrade process
to confirm the final degree level.
6.8.23.
The faculty Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies is responsible for ensuring that the
procedures are followed within the faculties. Where this responsibility is devolved
to a PGR Committee based in departments or research centres, the Associate Dean
for Doctoral Studies should ensure that the monitoring mechanisms are effective
and that improvements are being made towards submission and successful
completion times and to the quality of the supervisory process.
6.8.24.
Faculty representatives on the university’s Postgraduate Research Students
Subcommittee will be required to address the effectiveness of the process and any
issues arising from it in their faculty’s annual report.
6.8.25.
Progression timelines and requirements for professional doctorate degrees may
vary. These will be outlined in the relevant programme specification.
First attempt at the upgrade
6.8.26.
There are three possible outcomes to a formal upgrade review:
75
a. unconditional pass: the student’s registration is transferred from MPhil to
PhD with immediate effect;
b. refer for further review: the student does not meet the requirements to
upgrade at this time and is required to meet conditions set by the panel and
undertake a further formal review. This will follow the same process as the
first review.
The student will be required to either:
• complete minor amendments for the current upgrade attempt. Where
minor amendments have been completed and submitted, the panel
will determine the final outcome of the upgrade attempt as either an
unconditional pass or a fail (see 6.8.26c); or
• repeat a second attempt at the full upgrade process including re-
submission of documents and a panel meeting, at which the student
must be physically present.
c. fail: the review determines:
• that the student’s registration should remain at MPhil; or
• that proceedings to terminate the student’s registration under
academic regulations 8.2-8.25 should commence.
6.8.27.
Formal notification of outcome (b) above to the student shall be classed as a
written warning under academic regulations 8.2-8.25, provided that this is made
clear to the student in the notification.
Second attempt at the upgrade (if necessary)
6.8.28.
There will be two possible outcomes to a second formal upgrade review:
a. unconditional pass: the student’s registration is transferred from MPhil to
PhD with immediate effect;
b. fail: the review determines:
• that the student’s registration should remain at MPhil; or
• that proceedings to terminate the student’s registration under
academic regulation 8.2-8.25 should commence.
Post upgrade review
6.8.29.
Removal under academic regulations 8.2-8.25 shall only be permitted after a
second upgrade review, unless the student was formally notified prior or after the
first upgrade review in the manner specified in the academic regulations that their
progress was not satisfactory.
6.8.30.
Students can appeal the outcome of an upgrade review in accordance with the
procedure set out within the academic appeals regulations (6.13.44 – 6.13.79).
6.8.31.
Students who remain at MPhil level will need to submit a final thesis and have an
examination as per the normal examination regulations. The upgrade meeting
76
does not automatically lead to an MPhil award. Students on the MPhil route will
be expected to adhere to the submission periods for that programme.
6.8.32.
Students should not be allowed to continue their research without their
registration status being clear.
MD(Res) review for transfer to year two
6.8.33.
At one year from registration (or two years if part-time), MD(Res) students are
required to give a presentation to the academic members of the relevant
progression committee in order to transfer to the second year of the programme.
This is a mandatory requirement and a satisfactory transfer review is required for
the student to continue their registration. The aim is to satisfy the academic panel
that the student’s research is progressing satisfactorily, to ensure the student is on
track to successfully complete their degree, and to help the student and
supervisors anticipate any potential problems.
6.8.34.
The key principle for MDRes review is for an academic panel, at least two of whom
have to be independent to the supervisory team, to assess that the student is on
course to produce research of the required standard for the final degree within the
permitted timescale. This is a mandatory requirement, and a satisfactory review is
required for the student to continue their registration.
6.8.35.
The review is classed by the university as a formal milestone to be satisfactorily
attained by students in their progress towards attaining their MDRes degree.
6.8.36.
The MDRes review will be considered:
a. after the student has completed nine months of full-time study, or eighteen
months’ part-time study;
b. before the student has completed fifteen months of full-time study, or thirty
months’ part-time study.
6.8.37.
The MDRes review must be completed within the above timeframes. This includes
the first and, if necessary, the second attempt, plus the completion of any
associated tasks or conditions prescribed by the faculty of registration.
6.8.38.
There are three possible outcomes to a formal review:
a. Unconditional pass
b. Refer for further review
The student does not meet the requirements at this time and is required to
meet conditions set by the panel and undertake a further formal review.
This will follow the same process as the first review. The student will be
required to either:
• complete minor amendments; or
• repeat the full review process including re-submission of documents, if
appropriate, and a panel meeting, at which the student must be
present.
77
Following review of these amendments, the panel will determine the final
outcome of the review as either an unconditional pass or a fail with the
options as below.
c. Fail
The review determines:
• that proceedings to terminate the student’s registration under
academic regulation 8.2-8.25 should commence.
6.8.39.
Removal under academic regulations 8.2-8.25 shall only be permitted after a
second review, except where the student was formally notified prior to their first
review in the manner specified in the academic regulations that their progress was
not satisfactory.
6.8.40.
A student will only be allowed to undertake a maximum of two formal reviews,
i.e., the initial review and one additional review.
6.8.41.
Students can appeal against the outcome of the review, in accordance with the
procedure set out within the Academic appeals for research degree students.
Transfer to ‘pending submission’ status
6.8.42.
When a student has completed the data collection and research required for their
research degree, they may apply to transfer status from registration as a full-time
or part-time student to that of ‘pending submission’ status according to the
procedure established by the faculty of registration.
6.8.43.
Transfer to pending submission status will only be approved following three years
of full-time study, or six years of part-time study.
6.8.44.
Transfer to pending submission status is not an automatic right and the decision
on whether to permit the transfer of registration status should not be made solely
by the student’s supervisory teams.
6.8.45.
The maximum pending submission registration period for both full- and part-time
students is one year.
6.8.46.
If a student does not submit within the one year allowed for pending submission
but is permitted to continue their degree, they must be transferred back to full- or
part-time status and charged the appropriate fee.
6.8.47.
Should the transfer to pending submission take place after three years’ full-time
registration (or six years’ part-time registration), then the student will not be
entitled to the full year usually permitted for pending submission. In this instance,
the required submission deadline will come before the end of the pending
submission year and must always take precedence.
6.8.48.
Pending submission fees will not be charged pro-rata.
6.8.49.
Progress during the period of pending submission must be monitored by use of
regular progress reports.
78
6.8.50.
Where students are required to resubmit their thesis within eighteen months, as
noted in the research degree examination outcomes regulations, they will be
transferred back to upending submission status in order that their progress
towards resubmission can be monitored via regular progress reports, and
therefore will be charged pending submission fees. This period of ‘pending
submission’ is separate to any pending submission status that may have been in
place pre-exam.
6.9. Extending and exceeding
Extending the thesis submission deadline
6.9.1.
In exceptional cases, students may apply for an exemption to the regulations to
extend their submission deadline. Extensions can be requested for circumstances
that would otherwise be classified as a reason for interruption, for example illness
or personal difficulties. Another reason might be the sudden unexpected absence
of the supervisor. Extensions will not be permitted in cases of bad planning, lack of
academic progress or poor communication.
6.9.2.
If an exemption is requested based on medical/health problems, appropriate
supporting evidence (e.g. medical certificate, counsellors report) must be provided
by the student, usually noted by the supervisor and kept on the student file for
future reference where required. These problems may have been ongoing
throughout the research period. Without supporting documentation, an extension
may not be granted.
6.9.3.
If an exemption is requested for purely financial reasons it will be considered.
However, an exemption is not guaranteed and students should prioritise their
studies and adhere to the expectations relating to work that are covered in the
regulations on research degree entrance requirements and mode of study, and on
working and teaching during a research degree.
6.9.4.
Requests for an extension to a submission deadline must be made by the Associate
Dean for Doctoral Studies for the faculty of registration by completing the
exemption request form in advance of the deadline. Where possible, this should
be 3 months in advance of the submission deadline.
6.9.5.
Once submitted by the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, exemption requests
for postgraduate research programmes are approved via the Centre for Doctoral
Studies. A centralised record is kept to monitor requests.
6.9.6.
Exemptions relating to taught elements of professional doctorates will also require
approval from the faculty Board of Examiners.
6.9.7.
Requests to extend a deadline will change the final submission deadline; however,
the student will be classed as on-time submission provided they submit within the
approved extended period.
6.9.8.
The Centre for Doctoral Studies may decide to change applications to extend the
deadline to be approved under the category of exceeding if it is not considered
79
that a sufficiently strong case has been made or the application is submitted after
the original deadline has passed.
Exceeding the thesis submission deadline
6.9.9.
Where an extension to the submission deadline has been rejected or in
exceptional cases, students may apply for an exemption to the regulations in order
to exceed their submission deadline. Applications could include requests for
students who are approaching or have exceeded their original submission deadline
where there is no strong reason for this, for example, lack of organisation,
planning or progress.
6.9.10.
Requests to exceed a deadline will leave the original submission deadline
unchanged, but the student will be permitted to exceed their submission date and
to remain registered in order that they can submit their thesis within an approved
period of registration.
6.9.11.
Exceeding the submission deadline will result in a late submission within the key
performance indicators. It is designed to enable a student who is close to
submission but who will miss their deadline to submit rather than have their
studies terminated.
With both of the above types of exemption, the student must submit within the
extended period or termination of studies procedures will be started.
Late submission of thesis
6.9.12.
Where a student submits their thesis later than 24 hours after the submission
deadline, they must apply for an exemption to exceed their submission deadline.
6.10. Interruption of study
6.10.1.
An interruption of studies is a supportive mechanism where a student is permitted
by their faculty (and funder, where appropriate) to formally step away from their
studies for an agreed period.
6.10.2.
Although submission deadlines are adjusted accordingly for approved
interruptions, the interrupted period does count towards the maximum
registration period, as detailed in the regulations on research degree minimum
and maximum periods of registration. Students should be aware of, and adhere to,
the maximum period of registration for their programme.
6.10.3.
Students will be permitted to interrupt their studies for periods between one and
twelve months in most circumstances, with a maximum of twenty-four months
interruption during their degree. The total period of interruption across a research
degree programme will be a cumulative total of any/all periods of interruption. For
periods of interruption between twelve and twenty-four months, approval should
be sought from the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies within the faculty of
registration.
6.10.4.
Interruptions to the course of study may be requested for a number of
reasons, such as:
80
• illness;
• maternity/paternity leave;
• personal and family reasons;
• financial hardship;
• internships not directly related to the research project;
• periods of investigation of research misconduct or student complaints; and
• major restructuring of the department or research group.
These reasons are not exhaustive, and faculties may grant interruptions for other
reasons they consider acceptable.
6.10.5.
Interruptions will not normally be permitted based on:
• a change of research topic;
• lack of progress;
• fieldwork; or
• time spent training or in industry where this is part of the research
programme.
6.10.6.
In cases of illness or injury, the student should inform the supervisors and
department of absences of more than one week, and medical certification must be
provided.
6.10.7.
Retrospective interruptions are not allowed. In such cases an exemption request
should be submitted in order to extend or exceed the registration period.
6.11. Examination entry requirements
6.11.1.
The decision to submit a thesis for examination rests with the student, subject to
the faculty in which the student is registered confirming that:
• the student has completed the programme of study;
• the student meets the requirements of the programme; and
• that they conform to submission timescales as set out in the regulations on
research degree minimum and maximum periods of registration.
Entrance to examinations
6.11.2.
A student must give written notice to the university of their intention to submit via
the examination entry form (RD1). This form has to be submitted to the Research
Degrees Examinations Team at least four months prior to submission.
6.11.3.
The supervisor must use the examination entry form (RD1) to nominate the
examiners.
6.11.4.
Following the submission of the RD1, the university will appoint the examiners in
accordance with the regulations on conduct of research degree examinations.
6.11.5.
The RD1 is valid for a maximum of eighteen months. If a student fails to submit
their thesis within this period, they will be required to submit a new form.
81
6.11.6.
A thesis must be presented for examination in accordance with the procedures
and in the format specified by the university, which includes a requirement to
submit an electronic version of the thesis (e-thesis).
6.11.7.
The oral examination will normally take place within three months of dispatch of
the thesis, subject to examiners’ availability and the timely submission of the RD1.
6.11.8.
Once students submit, they will not be charged any further fees, even if their
registration period crosses over into a new academic year. They should continue to
receive access to library, computer facilities and supervisory support as required to
assist with preparation for their oral examination.
6.12. Examinations
Appointment of examiners
6.12.1.
For each student the Research Degrees Examinations Board shall oversee the
appointment of normally two individuals to act as examiners.
6.12.2.
Both examiners should be external to King’s College London. In exceptional
circumstances the Research Degrees Examinations Board can allow the
appointment of an internal examiner.
6.12.3.
If the student is a member of King’s staff, then the examiners will both have to be
external to the university.
6.12.4.
The Board may, if it considers it appropriate or if it is a requirement of a
programme, permit the appointment of three examiners to act jointly or an
Independent Chair and two examiners.
6.12.5.
The examiners formally approved by the Subject Area Board or university are
expected to perform this role through the entire examination process, including
re-examination if applicable.
6.12.6.
In the case of major amendments or re-examination, changes to approved
examination panels following first examination will only be allowed in exceptional
circumstances when the appointed examiners are not available. In these cases,
the Research Degrees Examinations Team will contact the supervisor with the
request to propose a new examiner using the examination entry form (RD1).
6.12.7.
For students registered for a research degree that is jointly awarded with another
institution, the Research Degrees Examinations Board may, at its discretion and on
application to it by the faculty concerned, approve a different composition to the
oral examination (details of specific arrangements will be detailed in the relevant
Schedule of Activity).
6.12.8.
The criteria for examiners is as follows:
a. examiners shall be expert in the field of the thesis and able to make an
independent assessment of the student;
b. between them, the examiners should have examined at least three research
degrees in the UK of appropriate level;
82
c. examiners should not have had any significant research or other contact
with the student. The student’s supervisor should not be an examiner nor
should they have had any role in the assessment or supervision of the
student;
d. There should be no personal link between the examiner and student;
e. an internal examiner will not have been involved in the supervision of the
student during the research period;
f. an internal examiner will not have been part of the upgrade assessment
panel of the student;
g. an internal examiner will not have been supervised by the student’s
supervisors for their own degree or post-doc;
h. an internal examiner will not have a close personal relationship with the
student’s supervisor;
i. reciprocal examining with a supervisor from another institution is not
permitted within a two-year period;
j. The repeated nomination of an examiner by a supervisor will not normally
be permitted within a two-year period;
k. a supervisor will not be able to use the same internal examiner more than
once per academic year;
l. former lay members of Council, students or employees of King’s shall not
normally be appointed before a period of three academic years has elapsed.
6.12.9.
An examiner from outside the UK or the Republic of Ireland shall be appointed
where the faculty can demonstrate that they are the most appropriate examiner
for the thesis. If an examiner from outside the UK or the Republic of Ireland is
appointed, the Board must be satisfied that the examiner is familiar with the
British higher education system and the general requirements and procedures for
the award of research degrees.
6.12.10.
Visiting professors, retired, emeritus and industry professionals can be appointed
where the faculty can demonstrate they are the most appropriate examiner for
the thesis, and providing one of the examiners holds a current and active position
at a UK university.
Conduct of examinations
6.12.11.
Examiners are required to:
• prepare independent preliminary written reports on the thesis to assist in
conducting the oral examination;
• submit the preliminary reports to the Research Degrees Exams office prior
to the oral examination for quality assurance purposes.
83
• exchange preliminary reports prior to the oral examination.
6.12.12.
If the examiners suspect cases of plagiarism or other research misconduct in the
thesis they must inform the Research Degrees Examinations Office before the oral
examination is due to take place. The Research Degrees Examinations Team will
ensure that the research misconduct process is followed and that the oral
examination does not take place.
6.12.13.
The examiners, after reading the thesis, shall conduct an oral examination with the
student in accordance with university guidelines.
6.12.14.
The oral examination may be conducted in face-to-face, fully remote or hybrid
format. Students are required to present themselves for oral, practical or written
examinations at such place and time as the university may direct. Students are
recommended to have a copy of their thesis to hand, either in hard copy or
electronic format.
6.12.15.
Where exams take place face-to-face, these will normally be conducted in London,
or at other King’s College London premises. The university may, however,
exceptionally agree, via the Research Degrees Examinations Board, that the
examination be conducted elsewhere if there are circumstances which make this
expedient.
6.12.16.
Different examination arrangements may be in place for joint awards involving a
partner institution. Details will be set out in the relevant partnership agreement.
6.12.17.
The student may indicate on their examination entry form whether their
supervisor(s) shall be present at the oral examination as an observer. The
supervisor(s) does not have the right to participate in the examination of the
student but may contribute if invited to do so by the examiners. Otherwise, the
oral examination shall be held in private.
6.12.18.
After an oral examination, a joint final report of the examiners and list of required
amendments (if applicable) must be submitted to the Research Degrees
Examinations Board via the Research Degrees Exams Office within three weeks of
the examination taking place.
6.12.19.
The joint final report shall indicate whether the thesis meets the requirements
listed in the criteria for research degree thesis and award regulations and shall
include a reasoned statement of the examiners’ judgment of the student’s
performance. Where applicable, the report should also include a list of required
amendments for the student to make.
6.12.20.
The examiners can inform the student of the outcome of the examination after the
oral examination.
6.12.21.
Following ratification by the Research Degrees Examinations Board, all examiner
reports and any list of required amendments will be released to the student by the
Research Degrees Exams Office.
84
6.12.22.
Examiners have the right to make comments in confidence to the university in a
separate report. Such comments should not normally be concerned with the
performance of the student but may cover, for example, matters which they wish
to draw to the attention of the Research Degrees Examinations Board or the
Centre for Doctoral Studies.
6.12.23.
All matters relating to the examination will be treated as confidential. Examiners
are not permitted to divulge the content of previously unpublished material in a
student’s thesis until any restrictions on access to the thesis, granted by the
university, are removed.
6.13. Examination Outcomes
6.13.1.
The options open to examiners in determining the result of the examination for
ratification by the Research Degree Exams Board are as follows and apply to all
research degree students regardless of when they first registered:
• Pass;
• Pass subject to minor amendments;
• Pass subject to major amendments;
• Re-examination of thesis (with or without second examination);
• Consideration for a lower, related award;
• Academic fail.
The result is recorded on the decision form.
Pass
6.13.2.
Where the student’s thesis meets the criteria for the specified award and the
student satisfies the examiners in all elements of the assessment, the examiners
will make a formal recommendation for award to the Research Degrees
Examinations Board.
Pass subject to minor amendments
6.13.3.
Where the student’s thesis broadly meets the criteria for the specified award and
the student satisfies the examiners in all other elements of the assessment, the
examiners will make a formal recommendation for award to the Research Degrees
Examinations Board, subject to the completion of minor amendments.
6.13.4.
Where the examiners have recommended award subject to minor amendments
the student will be given up to three months from the date on which the student
receives notification of the corrections required from the Research Degrees
Examinations Team following ratification of the report by the Research Degrees
Examinations Board.
6.13.5.
One examiner will be required to confirm that the amendments are appropriate
and have been made within the specified timeframe. Which examiner will do this
will be agreed between the examiners themselves and will be confirmed on the
Decision form.
6.13.6.
If the student fails to make the amendments in the timeframe or the examiner is
unable to confirm that the amendments are satisfactory, the procedure under
‘Failure to satisfy after minor or major amendments or after re-examination’
below will apply.
85
Pass subject to major amendments
6.13.7.
Where the student’s thesis is thought to be able to meet the criteria for the
specified award with additional work, the examiners will make a formal
recommendation for award to the Research Degrees Examinations Board subject
to the completion of major amendments within six months.
6.13.8.
A further oral examination will not be required where a six-month amendment
period is given.
6.13.9.
Where the examiners have recommended that the student be permitted to make
major amendments to their thesis, the student will be given up to six months from
the date on which the student receives the joint examination report and
notification of the corrections required by the Research Degrees Examinations
Team following ratification of the report by the Research Degrees Examinations
Board.
6.13.10.
Both examiners must confirm that the amendments are appropriate and have
been made within the specified timeframe.
6.13.11.
If the student fails to make the amendments in the specified timeframe or the
examiner is unable to confirm that the amendments are satisfactory, the
procedure outlined under ‘Failure to satisfy after minor or major amendments or
after re-examination’ below will apply.
Re-examination of thesis (with or without a second oral examination)
6.13.12.
Where the student’s thesis, though inadequate, is thought to be able to meet the
criteria for the specified award, the examiners may determine that the student be
permitted to re-present their thesis in a revised form. This will be within eighteen
months for the PhD or Professional Doctorate examination and twelve months for
the MPhil from the date on which the student receives the joint examination
report and notification of the corrections required by the Research Degrees
Examinations Team following ratification of the report by the Research Degrees
Examinations Board.
6.13.13.
The examiners must indicate on the examination decision form whether a further
oral examination is required. This decision cannot be changed upon receipt of
the revised thesis.
6.13.14.
Where the examiners have determined that the student’s thesis, though
inadequate, is thought to be able to meet the criteria for the specified award, the
student will be given eighteen months (twelve months for the MPhil) from the
date on which the student receives the joint examination report and notification of
the corrections required by the Research Degrees Examinations Team following
ratification of the report by the Research Degrees Examinations Board.
6.13.15.
As this is a re-examination to confirm degree, the examiners will examine the
amended thesis, submit preliminary reports (when a second oral examination was
required) and will provide a second joint examination report. The examiners will
be asked to confirm whether the amended thesis now meets the criteria to award
the degree.
86
6.13.16.
If the student fails to make the amendments in the specified timeframe or the
examiners are unable to confirm that the amendments are satisfactory, the
procedure outlined under ‘Failure to satisfy after minor or major amendments or
after re-examination’ below will apply.
6.13.17.
Students whose thesis examiners require them to resubmit within eighteen
months will be transferred back to pending submission status in order that their
progress towards resubmission can be monitored, and therefore will be charged
writing-up fees.
Consideration for a lower, related award
6.13.18.
Where the student’s thesis does not meet the criteria for the specified award, the
student may be considered for a related, lower degree (where available).
6.13.19.
Minor or major amendments, or the re-examination of the thesis within eighteen
months, may be permitted by the examiners before the student is considered for
the related, lower degree.
6.13.20.
Where additional time has already been granted for major or minor amendments
or after the re-examination of the thesis, no further additional time will normally
be given to the student to prepare the thesis for examination.
6.13.21.
For examination for the PhD only: Where the examiners have recommended that
the student be considered for a related, lower degree, the examiners may consider
whether the student has met the criteria for the award of an MPhil degree unless
this is a joint degree with an institution that does not offer the MPhil (although if
appropriate the student may be offered an MPhil single award from King’s College
London only).
6.13.22.
If the student’s thesis does not meet the criteria, the examiners will recommend to
the Research Degrees Examinations Board that the student be recorded as an
academic fail.
6.13.23.
For examination of Professional Doctorates only: Where the individual
programme specification permits, the final reports and outcome will be sent by
the examiners to the Research Degrees Examinations Team, who will forward the
information to the relevant Postgraduate Assessment Board for consideration of
an exit award.
Academic Fail
6.13.24.
Where the student’s thesis does not meet the criteria for the award of a research
degree and the thesis is unsuitable for minor or major amendments or re-
presentation within eighteen months the examiners will recommend to the
Research Degrees Examinations Board that the student be recorded as an
Academic Fail.
6.13.25.
A student who fails to satisfy the examiners will not be permitted to re-enter for
the examination.
87
Failure to satisfy the examiners after minor or major amendments or after the re-
examination of the thesis
6.13.26.
Where a student fails to satisfy the examiners after minor or major amendments
or after the re-examination of the thesis, the examiners will either:
a. recommend to the Research Degrees Examinations Board that the student
be recorded as an Academic Fail; or
b. recommend the student for consideration for a related, lower degree (as set
out above).
6.13.27.
The examiners have the discretion to permit an additional calendar month for the
student to make further minor amendments before making a final decision.
6.13.28.
In both cases the student has the right to appeal under section 6.15 on Academic
appeals for research degree students.
Additional examiner
6.13.29.
When the examiners appointed are unable to reach agreement when approving
amendments or following a re-examination, they shall report this to the Research
Degrees Examinations Board, which shall appoint an additional examiner who is
external to the university.
6.13.30.
Whenever possible the additional examiner shall be of Professorial status and shall
have considerable experience of examining for a research degree of the University
of London.
Thesis award
6.13.31.
With the exception of students registered for joint degrees, a student will not be
permitted to submit as their thesis one which has been or will be submitted for a
degree or comparable award of this or any other university or institution.
6.13.32.
The greater proportion of a student’s investigations must be carried out during the
period of registration.
6.13.33.
All theses for university degrees shall be written in English with the exception of
students whose subject involves an element of study of a modern foreign language
who may apply at the start of their degree to submit their thesis in a language
other than English. All such applications will need the support of the supervisor
and will be considered by the Research Degrees Examinations Board. In this
instance, an abstract in English of up to 5,000 words shall be submitted at the
same time as the thesis.
6.13.34.
The contribution by the student in any work done jointly with the supervisor(s)
and/or fellow research workers must be clearly stated by the student and certified
by the supervisor.
6.13.35.
For any thesis, publications derived from the work in the thesis but not forming a
main part of the work described may be bound as supplementary material at the
back of the thesis.
88
6.13.36.
In addition to a research component resulting in the submission of a thesis at
doctoral level:
a. a professional doctorate programme shall include elements of a
practical/work-related/professional nature and formally taught elements
appropriate to support the academic objectives of the degree programme;
b. a Master in Philosophical Studies (MPhilStud) degree programme shall
provide a student with advanced knowledge of three areas of the relevant
discipline, including sustained research on a single topic (presented in the
form of a thesis), and provide progressive research training which is an
adequate foundation for doctoral study.
Thesis incorporating publications
6.13.37.
Students are allowed to include in their thesis work that is already published, or
accepted for publication, at the time of submission of the thesis, either by the
student alone or jointly with others.
6.13.38.
The majority of the research making up the publication must have been done
under supervision at the university during the period of registration.
6.13.39.
The thesis will require additional chapters and information for it to meet the
requirements for a PhD degree, particularly that of the thesis being an integrated
whole and presenting a coherent argument.
6.13.40.
A series of papers alone, whether published or otherwise, is not acceptable for
submission as a thesis.
6.13.41.
A thesis incorporating publications should include at least one paper published, or
a paper accepted for publication, in a peer reviewed publication. This should be
presented in its final accepted form with appropriate referencing from the
relevant publication.
6.13.42.
The inclusion of a paper(s) accepted for publication within the thesis does not
guarantee that the thesis as an entity will be judged to have met the standards
required for the award.
6.13.43.
The thesis must be accompanied by a signed declaration by the student that the
work presented in the thesis is their own and explaining their contribution to
jointly authored publications. Further information can be found in Guidelines on
submitting a thesis incorporating publications.
Appeals
6.13.44.
There are two academic appeals processes available to research degrees students:
a. to appeal the PhD upgrade and MD(Res) transfer decisions;
b. to appeal the outcome of the thesis and oral examination.
Neither appeal process can be used to challenge academic judgement
89
6.13.45.
The appeal procedure in respect of upgrade decisions should be completed at
faculty level before the university will consider any appeal by the student under
the regulations on failure to make sufficient academic progress (regulations 8.2-
8.25).
6.13.46.
An appeal must be requested in writing on the upgrade appeal form and lodged
with the relevant faculty registry office within 15 working days of the upgrade
decision. The grounds of the appeal must be clearly stated in the appeal and
appropriate documentation supplied.
6.13.47.
The Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies in the faculty will normally advise the
student in writing of their decision on the appeal request within 10 working days
of receipt of the appeal, subject to collecting all relevant information and
interviewing people. The Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies will allow an appeal
to be heard if they are satisfied that one or more of the following criteria apply:
a. where there is evidence that the student’s performance may have been
adversely affected by mitigating circumstances which the student was
unable, or for valid reasons unwilling, to divulge to the examiners before the
decision was reached;
b. where there is clear evidence of a significant administrative or procedural
error on the part of the university in the conduct of the upgrade process and
that this accounted for the student’s performance.
6.13.48.
The Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies will have the discretion to take into
account grounds (including grounds of compassion) other than those stated above
in deciding whether to allow an appeal to be heard.
6.13.49.
Where a student submits an appeal that their examination was adversely affected
by alleged harassment, bullying or discrimination, or by any other factor, which, in
the opinion of the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, requires an investigation
which falls outside the remit of the appeal regulations and which constitutes a
complaint under the Student Complaints Policy, then the matter shall be referred
for consideration under that policy. In these circumstances, the appeal may be
suspended, at the discretion of the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, until the
consideration of the matter under the Student Complaints Regulations has been
concluded.
6.13.50.
Any information supplied by the student at a later date will only be considered if,
in the judgment of the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies, there are valid reasons
why it could not have been submitted as part of the initial appeal. However, the
student shall have the right to receive copies of any documents provided to the
appeals panel (including the information from the upgrade panel, the statement of
the student’s supervisor, and any referee’s reports), and may submit comments
for the panel’s consideration within five working days of being sent this
information.
90
6.13.51.
An appeals panel shall be established comprising:
• the Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies or nominee, who shall act as Chair;
• two members of the faculty Postgraduate Research Committee;
and will be supported by a representative from the relevant faculty or registry
office.
6.13.52.
The panel shall not include anyone involved in the original upgrade decision or the
student’s supervisors. At the discretion of the Chair, the panel may be
supplemented with additional member(s) with expertise in the academic area of
the appeal.
6.13.53.
The quorum for the panel shall be the Chair and two other members. The decision
of the panel shall be reached by a majority vote of the members, which may be
conducted by email correspondence. The Chair shall have an additional casting
vote where necessary.
6.13.54.
The upgrade panel which made the original decision will submit the outcome
provided to the student together with a more detailed account of the factors
which informed the decision.
6.13.55.
The student's first supervisor will be asked to provide a statement indicating
whether they support the appeal and whether they think that the student should
be allowed to upgrade and the reasons for their recommendation.
6.13.56.
The panel will consider:
• the upgrade outcome provided to the student;
• the supplementary information from the upgrade panel;
• the statement from the student’s supervisor(s);
• the written submission from the student appealing against the decision; and
• any further comments received from the student.
6.13.57.
Before making a decision the panel, at the discretion of the Chair, may decide to:
a. request a further referee’s report;
b. seek clarification from any party involved;
c. interview the student and/or supervisor.
6.13.58.
The panel is not required to meet unless it is decided to interview the student
and/or supervisor. In such circumstances, the student and the supervisor will be
invited to attend the meeting of the panel and may each give evidence to the
panel. The student may be accompanied by a colleague, friend or representative of
the King's College London Students' Union.
91
6.13.59.
The panel shall normally reach a decision on the appeal within thirty working days
of receipt, subject to the need to compile the above information and to meet as
appropriate.
6.13.60.
The panel may take one of the following decisions:
a. to reject the appeal and uphold the decision to terminate the student’s
registration;
b. to reject the appeal and uphold the decision that the student’s registration
should continue at MPhil level;
c. to uphold the appeal and allow the MPhil to PhD upgrade;
d. to uphold the appeal and allow the student a further opportunity to
attempt the MPhil to PhD upgrade.
6.13.61.
In the event of a) being the decision of the panel, removal proceedings shall
commence under the Academic Progress Regulations. The student has the right to
appeal against the removal in accordance with academic regulations 8.2-8.25.
Appeals concerning decisions of examiners: thesis and oral examination
6.13.62.
An appeal must be requested in writing on a form provided for the purpose and
lodged with the Head of Student Conduct and Appeals (HoSCA) on behalf of the
Principal within 15 working days of the date of notification to the student of the
result of the examination. The grounds for the appeal must be clearly stated as
part of the request and appropriate documentation supplied within the deadline
for submission of the appeal.
6.13.63.
The Principal will normally advise the student in writing of their decision on the
appeal request within 30 working days of receipt of the appeal. An appeal will be
permitted if the Principal is satisfied that one or more of the following criteria
apply:
a. where there is evidence that the student’s performance at the oral
examination may have been adversely affected by mitigating circumstances
which the student was unable, or for valid reasons unwilling, to divulge to
the examiners before the decision was reached;
b. where there is clear evidence of significant administrative or procedural
error on the part of the university in the conduct of the examination and
that this accounted for the student’s performance.
6.13.64.
The Principal will have the discretion to take into account grounds (including
grounds of compassion) other than those stated above in deciding whether to
allow an appeal to be heard.
6.13.65.
Where a student submits an appeal that their examination was adversely affected
by alleged harassment, bullying or discrimination, or by any other factor, which, in
the opinion of the Principal, requires an investigation which falls outside the remit
of these appeal regulations and which constitutes a complaint under the Student
92
Complaints Policy, then the matter shall be referred for consideration that policy
and procedure. In these circumstances, the appeal may be suspended, at the
discretion of the Principal, until the consideration of the matter under the Student
Complaints Policy has been concluded.
6.13.66.
If the Principal decides to allow an appeal they will appoint an Appeal Committee
and will advise the student in writing of their decision on the appeal application. If
an appeal is rejected reasons will be given.
6.13.67.
The student has the right to appear before the Appeal Committee. The student
may be represented by another member of the university or a member of the
King’s College London Students’ Union or, where the student is registered on a
programme associated with professional practice, a member of their professional
organisation. The student may also be accompanied by a family member or a
friend (either from inside or outside the university) but that person will not be
allowed to speak at the hearing. However, the Chair of the Appeal Committee will
have the discretion to consider representations from the person accompanying the
student to make a statement.
6.13.68.
If the student is to be represented and/or accompanied then the names of the
attendees must be received in writing by the HoSCA at least forty-eight hours in
advance of the hearing. The Chair of the Appeal Committee has the discretion to
refuse to permit a representative or friend or family member to attend where
prior written notice has not been given.
6.13.69.
The examiners shall be invited to attend the meeting of the Appeal Committee.
The university reserves the right to call any other relevant individuals to present
evidence to the Committee.
6.13.70.
The Committee shall normally conduct the proceedings in the presence of both
the student and the examiners. The student and/or their representative have the
right to be present throughout the meeting of the Appeal Committee, as have the
examiners, until such time as the Committee retires to consider its findings. The
absence of the student or the examiners will not prevent the hearing from taking
place nor invalidate the proceedings.
6.13.71.
Written notice of the date of the hearing will be sent to the student as soon as
possible following the Principal’s decision to refer the matter to an Appeal
Committee. The names of the Committee members together with all documentary
evidence will normally be sent to the Committee and to the student at least seven
days before the hearing date. Any concerns regarding documentation or
membership of the Committee should be raised in writing by the student at the
earliest opportunity in advance of the hearing to the HoSCA.
6.13.72.
The documentation with which the Committee is provided shall include:
a. the written submissions of the student and of the examiners (should they
wish to make a written submission);
b. the final report(s) and the preliminary independent reports of the
examiners;
93
c. any documentation that either the student or the examiners wish to submit.
6.13.73.
In addition, the Committee may request to see any other documentation it
considers relevant to the appeal.
6.13.74.
The procedure is for the student to address the Committee first and, during this
part of the proceedings; they may call witnesses, if this has been agreed by the
Chair of the Committee at least five working days in advance of the hearing. The
examiners shall be invited to make any observations. Any questions by the student
or the examiners shall be put through the Chair. The student may make any
concluding remarks. The members of the Appeal Committee may put questions to
any of those present at any time during the proceedings. The Chair has the
discretion to vary the procedure in any case where they consider it just to do so.
6.13.75.
The Appeal Committee shall take one of the following decisions:
a. to reject the appeal, in which case the result of the outcome of the
examination appealed stands;
b. to request the examiners to reconsider their decision. The examiners shall
normally be expected to hold another oral examination before reaching a
decision as to whether the result should be changed;
c. to determine that the original examination be cancelled and that a new
examination be conducted. The new examination shall be conducted by
examiners who did not take part in the original examination and were not
involved in the appeal.
i. For an appeal following the first examination, normally the new
examiners will be sent the original thesis submission and will have all
the examination outcome options available to them. They will not
have access to the original examiners’ reports.
ii. For an appeal following any subsequent examinations, normally the
new examiners shall have access to the outcome appealed, i.e. be
sent the original examiners’ reports and the most recently examined
thesis. A new revised thesis is not permitted under this outcome.
6.13.76.
The decision of the Appeal Committee shall be final and shall be provided to the
student in writing normally within five working days of the appeal hearing. The
Committee shall provide reasons for its decision.
6.13.77.
When a new examination is to be held, new examiners shall be appointed in
accordance with the academic regulations for research degrees. However, all
examiners should be external to the university. The examiners may make any of
the decisions open to the original examiners. The examiners will not be given any
detailed information about the previous examination except the single fact that
they are conducting a new examination following an appeal.
6.13.78.
The result of the original examination having been cancelled, the result of the new
examination shall be considered by the Research Degrees Examination Board.
94
6.13.79.
The result of the original examination having been cancelled; the result of the new
examination shall be considered by the Research Degrees Examination Board.
Availability of thesis
6.13.80.
It is a requirement that a thesis resulting from a research degree undertaken at the
university is placed within the public domain once it has been awarded and
ratified. Theses will be made available electronically, via the system determined by
the university.
6.13.81.
A thesis will normally be placed in the public domain immediately after the award
of the degree. Departure from this requirement will only be made when the
student can demonstrate circumstances such as grounds of commercial
exploitation or patenting, or where the thesis includes material which is of
significance to national security or personal safety and/or where a funding body
allows.
6.13.82.
A student may apply to the Chair of the Research Degrees Examination Board for
restriction of access to their thesis, subject to the conditions noted above. The
student’s application must be submitted after the date of award but before the
final thesis is submitted to the library.
6.13.83.
Where approved, a restriction of access will normally be granted for a period of
one or five years. A permanent restriction of access may be sought on very limited
grounds relating to personal or national security, or where permission to include
third party copyright material could not be obtained and exclusion of this material
would significantly reduce the academic value of the thesis.
6.13.84.
Theses funded by a Research Council UK training grant must be placed in the
public domain within a maximum of twelve months following award.
6.13.85.
The availability of theses produced as part of a joint programme must also
conform to the publication requirements of the partner institution.
Revocation
6.13.86.
An award type, award title or classification can be revoked and reissued, or an
award can be revoked in its entirety under the following conditions:
a. where there is satisfactory proof that there was an administrative error in
the award made;
b. when, subsequent to award, the Research Degrees Examination Board takes
into account information which was unavailable at the time its original
decision was made;
c. following a recommendation or ruling by the Misconduct Committee; or
d. following a recommendation or ruling by an Inquiry Panel established to
investigate allegations of research misconduct.
95
Policies and Procedures
Postgraduate Research Students, Involvement in Teaching & Learning
Data Protection Policy
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Non-Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Complaints Policy
Interruption of Study Policy and Procedure
Useful Links
Centre for Doctoral Studies
Research Degree Examinations
Office of the Independent Adjudicator
Student Conduct and Appeals
Glossary
96
CHAPTER 7: ACADEMIC SUPPORT AND APPEALS
The following regulations are subject to regular review and updated versions apply irrespective of the
year of a student’s registration.
This section outlines the regulations, policies and procedures in place to support students during
their studies at King’s. This includes information on:
• Personalised Assessment Arrangements
• Mitigating Circumstances
• Support for Study
• Academic Appeals
In accordance with the Equality Act 2010, the university will consider any reasonable adjustments to
these regulations to take into account the needs of individual students.
Personalised Assessment Arrangements
7.1.
Students may apply for Personalised Assessment Arrangements in certain circumstances
and depending on qualifying criteria currently published here.
7.2.
Provision may be made for a student to undertake an alternative format of assessment, if
the Personalised Assessment Arrangements Applications Panel, in consultation with the
Assessment Sub-Board, considers the original format of the assessment to be
impracticable for that student, or the duration of the examination, with any additional
arrangements in place, would extend over 4.5 hours.
Mitigating Circumstances
7.3.
Where recognisably disruptive or unexpected events beyond the student’s control might
have a significant and adverse impact on their academic performance, a student should
submit a mitigating circumstances form and consult the Mitigating Circumstances Policy.
Support for Study
7.4.
There may be occasions where a student’s physical or mental health may give rise to
concerns about the student’s support for study and capacity to engage with their studies
or about the appropriateness of their behaviour in relation to the university community.
Where this is considered to be the case, the university may interrupt a student if it is in
the best interests of the student or the King’s community.
7.5.
The aim of Support for Study Policy is to enable a student to succeed and progress in a
supportive environment, whilst being mindful of the need to ensure safety and wellbeing
of the student themselves and of other university members.
Academic Appeals for pre-undergraduate, undergraduate and postgraduate taught students
7.6.
Pre-undergraduate, undergraduate and postgraduate taught students may submit an
academic appeal. This cannot be used to challenge academic judgement.
7.7.
Postgraduate Research Students should refer to Chapter 6, Framework for Postgraduate
Research Awards for the two academic appeals processes available:
a. to appeal the PhD upgrade and MD(Res) transfer decisions;
97
b. to appeal the outcome of the thesis and oral examination.
7.8.
The Head of Student Conduct and Appeals (HoSCA) holds delegated responsibility for the
appeals process from the Director of Students and Education.
7.9.
Other than the below, no decision of an Assessment Sub-Board, acting in accordance
with university regulations, may be modified. The appeals process cannot be used to
challenge academic judgment; appeals based on academic judgment will not be
considered.
7.10.
Marks will never be raised following an academic appeal based on regulation 7.17a.
7.11.
It is expected that all parties involved in an academic appeal will act reasonably and fairly
and treat the process in a respectful manner. If inappropriate behaviour is displayed,
action may be taken.
7.12.
The university may pause or stop the consideration of any appeal submitted where
students are suspected to be in breach of regulation 8.26 (Misconduct) or regulations
8.27-8 (Fitness to Practise), and action should be taken under those regulations.
7.13.
If an appeal contains matters which fall under regulations 8.41-8.43 (Student
Complaints), consideration of the appeal may be paused until the complaints process is
complete. In such cases, the findings of the complaint investigation may be considered as
evidence for the appeal.
7.14.
Group appeals are permitted. A group should raise any issues with the programme lead
via their student representative or a nominated member of the group. If the matter is not
resolved, the nominated student will then submit the appeal and communicate with the
university on behalf of the group. Any outcome of an appeal will apply to all members of
the group.
Collaborative Provision
7.15.
Where students from another institution takes an intercollegiate module with the
university as the host institution, the university will manage the academic appeal process
under these regulations.
Stage One Appeal
7.16.
Students should submit a Stage One Appeal Form within 15 working days of the release
of ratified results. Appeals received after this deadline will only be accepted at the
discretion of the HoSCA.
7.17.
Student may appeal on either or both of the following grounds:
a. where there is evidence that assessment(s) may have been adversely affected
by mitigating circumstances which they were unable, or for valid reasons
unwilling, to make known before the original decision was reached;
b. where there is clear evidence that assessment(s) may have been adversely
affected by a significant administrative error on the part of the university or in
the conduct of the assessment.
98
7.18.
Students who are dissatisfied with the outcome of the mitigating circumstances process,
may submit an academic appeal once their results have been ratified on either or both of
the following grounds:
a. that there is new evidence that could not have been, or for good reason was
not, made available at the time of the submission of the mitigating
circumstances form and that sufficient evidence remains that their mitigating
circumstances warrant further consideration;
b. that evidence can be produced of significant procedural error on the part of the
university in the consideration of the mitigating circumstances, and that
sufficient evidence remains that the original mitigating circumstances warrant
further consideration.
7.19.
A Stage One appeal may be rejected before forwarding to the Assessment Board for
consideration in the following circumstances:
a. where the appeal is not made on the correct form, or the form is incomplete;
b. where the appeal has been submitted late;
c. where, if appealing on grounds of reasonable adjustments in accordance with
the Equality Act there is no independent third-party evidence of the mitigating
circumstances; or the evidence provided is not a certified translation;
d. where the appeal contains no evidence that either of the grounds for review has
been met;
e. where the appeal is frivolous or vexatious; and/or
f. where the appeal does not fall within the scope of this regulation and should be
considered under an alternative regulation.
7.20.
If the appeal is rejected at this stage a student can contest this decision but is not able to
submit additional evidence.
7.21.
Any contestation submitted must be submitted to the HoSCA within 5 working days of
the date of notification of the decision. The HoSCA will consider whether the decision to
reject the appeal was made in accordance with these regulations. If the contestation is
accepted, the appeal will be passed to the Assessment Board for consideration. If the
contestation is rejected, there are no further opportunities for the appeal to be
considered.
7.22.
The Assessment Board will normally consider the appeal and report its decision to the
HoSCA within 30 working days of the release of results.
7.23.
The Assessment Board will decide whether the grounds for appeal have been met or not.
Where the ground(s) have been met, the Board will decide whether to modify or confirm
the original decision made by the Assessment Sub-Board. Where the ground(s) have not
been met, the original decision of the Assessment Sub-Board stands. The Board may also
99
reject the appeal on any of the grounds set out in regulation 7.19, or where students
have challenged academic judgment.
7.24.
A written statement confirming the decision of the Board and the reasons for this will be
prepared by the Chair of the Board. This statement should be sent to the HoSCA and
included in the outcome letter which is sent to the student.
Stage Two Appeal
7.25.
Students may appeal the decision of an Assessment Board on the following grounds:
a. that there is new evidence that could not have been, or for good reason was
not, made available at the time of the Stage One submission and that sufficient
evidence remains that the appeal warrants further consideration; and/or
b. that evidence can be produced of significant procedural error on the part of the
university in considering the appeal, and that sufficient evidence remains that
the appeal warrants further consideration; and/or
c. giving due consideration to the evidence and representations previously
provided, the decision of the Assessment Board was unreasonable.
7.26.
Students should submit a Stage Two Appeal Form within 10 working days of the Stage
One Appeal outcome. Appeals received after this deadline will only be accepted at the
discretion of the HoSCA.
7.27.
The HoSCA (or their nominee) will normally advise students in writing of their decision on
the appeal request within 30 working days of receipt. If it is determined that an appeal
should be heard an Appeal Committee will be arranged in accordance with the Appeal
Committee Structure.
Stage Two Appeal – Appeal Committee
7.28.
Students may be represented at the Appeal Committee by another university member or
a member of the student’s professional organisation (where applicable) or a member of
the King’s College London Students’ Union.
7.29.
Additionally, students may be accompanied by a family member or a friend who will not
be able to speak on the student’s behalf, unless this is a reasonable adjustment, such as a
sign language communicator or interpreter.
7.30.
If students are to be represented or accompanied, the name of the person who is to
attend must be received in writing by the HoSCA at least 48 hours in advance of the
Committee. The Chair of the Appeal Committee may accept or reject a request, and their
decision will be final. The Chair may refuse to permit a representative, friend or family
member to attend where 48 hours’ notice has not been received.
7.31.
Written notice of the Committee will normally be sent to students, together with the
names of the Committee members and the Chair, and all documentary evidence, at least
10 working days before the Committee date. Any concerns regarding documentation or
membership of the Committee should be raised in writing, by students at the earliest
opportunity to the HoSCA.
100
7.32.
New evidence that has not already been submitted as part of the appeal will not normally
be considered by the Appeal Committee. Should either party wish to submit new
evidence this must be done at least 5 working days before the Committee date. The Chair
of the Appeal Committee may accept or reject new evidence, and their decision will be
final.
7.33.
The Appeal Committee shall consider the documentary evidence and invite the student
and the Assessment Board Chair (or their nominee) to give evidence. Other persons shall
be asked to attend to give evidence if the Committee wishes.
7.34.
The absence of the student or the Chair of the Assessment Board will not prevent the
Committee from taking place nor invalidate the proceedings. If a student has indicated
they will attend but then cannot do so for good reason, an adjournment would generally
be considered.
7.35.
The Appeal Committee will determine whether there is sufficient reason to challenge
Stage One Appeal outcome. If there is sufficient reason, the Appeal Committee can set
aside the decision of the Assessment Board and replace it with one of its own, or it can
refer the case back to the Assessment Board for fresh consideration with commentary. If
there is insufficient reason, the appeal will be dismissed, and the outcome of the Stage
One Appeal will stand.
7.36.
Where an appeal is upheld, the Appeal Committee may set aside an attempt at an
assignment or module and permit the student to be re-assessed in any specific
assessment or specific module, not limited to those listed by the student in their appeal.
The Appeal Committee has the discretion to consider other decisions, but these must
comply with the university regulations and the relevant programme requirements.
7.37.
An Appeal Committee is not an Assessment Board, and cannot raise marks in
assignments or modules, amend marks from fail to pass, raise degree classifications, or
make awards. If a successful appeal is regarding an award or classification the student’s
appeal will be referred back to the relevant Assessment Board for reconsideration.
7.38.
The decision of the Appeal Committee is final. There is no further right to appeal and no
right to appeal against the decision of the Assessment Board if the case has been referred
back to the Board.
7.39.
The decision of the Appeal Committee shall normally be communicated in writing by the
HoSCA to the student, and the Chair of the Assessment Board, within 5 working days of
the decision of the Appeal Committee.
7.40.
Students have no automatic right to continue with their studies or to progress to the next
stage of their programme pending the outcome of an appeal; the faculty may exercise
their discretion to allow this attendance, if applicable and permitted by the programme
regulations.
Policies and Procedures
Support for Study Policy
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Non-Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Mitigating Circumstances Policy
101
Complaints Policy
Fitness to Practise Policy
Interruption of Study Policy and Procedure
Personal Tutor Code of Practice
Useful Links
Student Conduct and Appeals webpages
Office of the Independent Adjudicator
Academic appeals for research students
Student Conduct and Appeals Committees
Glossary
102
CHAPTER 8: CONCERNS, CONDUCT AND COMPLAINTS
The following regulations are subject to regular review and updated versions apply irrespective of the
year of a student’s registration.
This section outlines the rights and responsibilities given to students registered at the university,
including the rules on behavioural and discipline requirements, and the action(s) the university can
take if they are breached. This section includes:
• Failure to make sufficient academic progress;
• Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct;
• Fitness to Practise;
• Emergency powers to exclude or suspend a student;
• Suspension for late payment of tuition fees;
• Student Complaints;
• Termination of registration due to inaccurate or untrue information.
General
8.1.
In accordance with the Equality Act 2010 the university will consider any reasonable
adjustments to these regulations to take into account the needs of individual students. If
a student states the behaviour giving rise to a disciplinary concern is related to their
disability, the university may consider carefully whether to proceed with disciplinary
action under these regulations, or to refer the student to support under other
regulations, policies and procedures.
Insufficient Academic Progress
8.2.
The College will ensure that students are fully aware of the possible consequences of
failure to make sufficient academic progress.
8.3.
A student’s registration may be terminated for failure to make sufficient academic
progress, including for any of the following reasons:
a. inability to meet the programme requirements;
b. lack of industry, including poor attendance;
c. lack of ability or aptitude;
d. persistent failure to respond to university communications or instructions;
e. for any other good academic cause.
8.4.
Before removal, a student should normally receive a written warning specifying the
improvements or actions to be undertaken within a specified timeframe and stating the
consequences of not doing so. The student’s tutor or supervisor should also be consulted.
Appeals against removal on academic grounds
8.5.
It is expected that all parties involved in an academic appeal will act reasonably and fairly
and treat the process in a respectful manner. If inappropriate behaviour is displayed,
action may be taken.
8.6.
The university may pause or stop the consideration of any appeal submitted where a
student is suspected to be in breach of regulation 8.26 and regulations 8.27-8, and action
should be taken under those regulations.
103
8.7.
If an appeal contains matters which fall under regulation 8.41, consideration of the
appeal may be paused until the complaints process is complete. In such cases, the
findings of the complaint investigation may be considered as evidence for the appeal.
8.8.
Students should submit a Progression Appeal Form within 10 working days of the final
notification of removal. Appeals received after this deadline will only be accepted at the
discretion of the Principal.
8.9.
Students may appeal on the following grounds:
a. there is new information which could not have been provided to the faculty at or
before the time the decision to remove was taken, and sufficient evidence
remains that the appeal warrants further consideration;
b. there is evidence of significant administrative or procedural error, including error
relating to the written warning to the student and student compliance with the
conditions of written notice, made at or before the time the decision to remove
was taken, and sufficient evidence remains that the appeal warrants further
consideration;
c. there are other grounds considered applicable by the Principal, including
compassion.
8.10.
The Principal will normally advise the student in writing of their decision on the appeal
within 30 working days of receipt. If it is determined that an appeal should be heard, an
Appeal Committee will be arranged, in accordance with the Appeal Committee Structure.
Representation
8.11.
The student may be represented at the Appeal Committee by another member of the
College, a member of the student’s professional organisation (where applicable), or a
member of the King’s College London Students’ Union (KCLSU).
8.12.
Additionally, the student may be accompanied by a family member or a friend. This
person will not be able to speak on the student’s behalf, unless this is a reasonable
adjustment, such as a sign language communicator or interpreter.
8.13.
If the student is to be represented or accompanied, the name of the person who is to
attend must be received in writing by the Head of Student Conduct and Appeals (HoSCA)
at least 48 hours in advance of the Appeal Committee. The Chair of the Appeal
Committee may accept or reject a request, and their decision will be final. The Chair may
refuse to permit a representative, friend or family member to attend where 48 hours’
notice has not been received.
8.14.
Written notice of the Appeal Committee will normally be sent to the student, together
with the names of the Committee members and the Chair, and all documentary evidence,
at least 10 working days before the Appeal Committee date. Any concerns regarding
documentation or membership of the Committee should be raised in writing by the
student at the earliest opportunity to the HoSCA.
104
8.15.
New evidence that has not already been submitted as part of the appeal will not normally
be considered by the Appeal Committee. Should either party wish to submit new
evidence this must be done at least 7 days before the Committee date. The Chair of the
Appeal Committee may accept or reject new evidence, and their decision will be final.
8.16.
The Appeal Committee shall consider the documentary evidence and invite the student
and the Executive Dean of Faculty (or nominee) to give evidence. Other persons shall be
asked to attend to give evidence if the Committee wishes.
8.17.
The absence of the student or the Executive Dean of Faculty will not prevent the Appeal
Committee from taking place nor invalidate the proceedings. In the event that a student
has indicated they will attend but then cannot do so for good reason, an adjournment
would generally be considered.
8.18.
The Appeal Committee will determine whether there is sufficient reason to challenge the
original decision to withdraw. If there is sufficient reason, the Appeal Committee can set
aside the decision and replace it with one of its own, or it can refer the case back for
fresh consideration with commentary. If there is insufficient reason, the appeal will be
dismissed, and the original decision will stand.
8.19.
The decision of the Appeal Committee shall normally be communicated in writing by the
HoSCA to the student and Executive Dean of Faculty, within 5 working days of the
decision of the Appeal Committee.
8.20.
Students have no automatic right to continue with their studies or to progress to the next
stage of their programme pending the outcome of an appeal; the faculty may exercise
their discretion to allow this attendance, if applicable and permitted by the programme
regulations.
Removal of a student from an external environment
8.21.
Students undertaking a placement or a period of study or practical training in an external
working or educational environment have a responsibility to conform to the regulations,
policies and expected standards of behaviour and competence of that external
environment. Examples of such external environments may include, but are not limited
to:
a. hospitals, GP clinics, dental surgeries and other NHS facilities;
b. faculties.
c. UK or overseas HEIs;
d. offices and other industrial facilities;
e. teaching schools;
f. law courts;
g. health centres;
h. firms.
8.22.
Students undertaking a placement may be removed without notice from that
environment by the supervisor/mentor within that environment or the College, where
there are concerns with the student, or for any other reason. Examples of concerns may
include, but are not limited to:
a. behaviour which is deemed offensive or unacceptable in the external
environment;
105
b. behaviour or actions in breach of the regulations of the external environment;
c. behaviour which compromises the activities of the external environment;
d. a health condition which would render the student unsuitable or unsafe to
continue in the external environment;
e. a level of competence which would compromise the professional standards of the
external environment;
f. failure to observe health and safety requirements of the external environment;
g. behaviour which gives rise to concerns about the student’s fitness to practise.
8.23.
Where possible and appropriate, the university will arrange for students to undertake an
alternative placement, in accordance with the procedures and practice of the relevant
faculty.
8.24.
Where the removal is temporary or for a specified period, conditions may be placed on
students before re-entry to the external environment will be allowed. Such conditions
may constitute a written warning.
8.25.
If the university considers the reasons for the removal would require a misconduct
investigation under regulation 8.26 or a fitness to practise investigation under regulation
8.27-8, the student’s removal from the external environment will be temporary, pending
the outcome of the proceedings. Students may attend classes and sit assessments that
are not in the external environment during this period. As part of its outcome, the
Committee will confirm the status of the student’s removal from the external
environment; if this is permanent and the student will be unable to complete their
programme of study, their registration will be terminated.
Conduct
8.26.
Students are expected to maintain good conduct at all times whilst on university
premises or engaged in university activities. This includes:
a. adhering to the regulations, procedures and policies of the College, including the
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure and Non-Academic Misconduct Policy &
Procedure;
b. showing respect for the persons within and for the property of the King’s
community;
c. behaving in a way that does not interfere with the proper functioning or activities
of the College.
Failure to do so is considered misconduct. Where concerns about a student’s conduct
have been identified, the Academic Misconduct Policy and/or the Non-Academic Policy
and procedure will be invoked.
106
Fitness to Practise
8.27.
Student registration may be terminated as a result of a fitness for registration and fitness
to practise hearing. When conferring awards which lead to professional qualifications
registerable with a Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body, the university must be
satisfied that the student would be a safe and suitable entrant to the given profession,
and as such would be fit for registration and fit to practise.
8.28.
King’s College London is committed to ensuring students are safe and suitable entrants to
their given profession. Where concerns about the health, behaviour and/or professional
conduct of a student have been identified as adversely affecting the student’s fitness to
practise, the Fitness to Practise Policy and Procedure will be invoked.
Emergency powers to exclude or suspend
8.29.
A student who is the subject of misconduct proceedings, has a pending Fitness to Practise
hearing, has a pending Support for Study meeting, or is the subject of police investigation
or criminal proceedings, may be suspended or excluded by the Principal pending the
outcome of the investigation, the Committee or the trial. Students may also be
suspended or excluded on health and safety grounds, or where they are considered a
danger to other members of the King’s community.
8.30.
Failure to comply with the terms of a suspension or exclusion is an offence of student
conduct under the Non-Academic Misconduct Policy.
8.31.
The Principal may delegate the emergency powers to a Vice-Principal, who will be
responsible for reporting any suspensions or exclusions.
8.32.
Exclusion is selective restriction on attendance at or access to, the university and on
participation in university activities. Suspension is a total prohibition on attendance at, or
access to, the university and on participation in university activities. It may be subject to
conditions, such as permission to attend an examination. A suspension will only be used
where an exclusion is deemed to be inadequate.
8.33.
The terms of a suspension or exclusion may include a No Contact Agreement, requiring
the student to have no contact with a named person or persons.
8.34.
Suspensions and exclusions are not penalties; the Principal will only impose such
measures when it is urgent and necessary to do so. Written reasons for the decision will
be recorded and made available to students in the letter of suspension.
8.35.
Suspensions and exclusions shall normally start with immediate effect. The reasons for
the decision will be communicated to students in writing, as well as information about
their right to submit representations against it. Representations must be submitted
within 5 working days of the suspension or exclusion and will normally be reviewed
within a further five working days.
8.36.
Should the suspension or exclusion remain in place, the Head of Student Conduct and
Appeals (or nominee) and a Vice-Principal will review the suspension or exclusion every
28 days, in the light of any developments, or of any representations made by the student.
Reviews of suspensions and exclusions will not involve hearings or meetings.
107
Suspension for late payment of tuition fees
8.37.
Students are required to pay their fees in accordance with the Student Terms and
Conditions and via the fee payment procedures.
8.38.
Students who have received notification of impending suspension because of late
payment of tuition fees will be required to sit examinations and/or submit coursework.
8.39.
If students are suspended for the late payment of tuition fees following the completion
of their assessments, indicative marks will not be released and marks will not be ratified.
Where a suspension is subsequently lifted, indicative marks will be released, and marks
will be ratified as soon as possible (including by Chair’s action if no meeting of the
Assessment Sub-Boards is scheduled to take place within a reasonable timeframe).
8.40.
Students who miss an examination or assessment deadline as a result of suspension for
late payment of tuition fees will not be considered to have attempted that examination
or assessment. Students who subsequently have their suspension lifted will be permitted
to sit the examination or assessment at the next available opportunity without further
penalty.
Complaints
8.41.
Complaints from students are carefully considered and, if appropriate, shall be
investigated by the Head of Student Conduct and Appeals.
8.42.
King’s College London is committed to considering and investigating genuine complaints
from students. The university defines a complaint as an expression of dissatisfaction that
warrants a response, and this policy provides a clear mechanism for that to happen. The
university will review what led to the complaint and where appropriate seek an early
resolution. Outcomes can also be used to improve services to all members of the College.
For more information see the Student Complaints Policy.
8.43.
A student may ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator to consider any unresolved
complaint against the College.
Termination
8.44.
If a student or a third party on behalf of the student, is found to have provided untrue or
inaccurate information, or to have omitted information at enrolment or during the
application process, registration can be terminated without notice. However, the student
will have a right to appeal that decision.
Policies and Procedures
Support for Study Policy and Procedure
Mitigating Circumstances Policy
Safeguarding Policy
Drugs & Alcohol Misuse Policy
Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Fitness to Practise Policy
Non-Academic Misconduct Policy & Procedure
Complaints Policy
Residences Discipline Policy
Data Protection Policy
108
Missing Persons Procedure
Home Visit Procedure
Student Emergency Contact Procedure
Prolonged Lack of Contact Guidance
Useful links:
Academic Appeals
KCLSU Advice
Student Conduct and Appeals webpages
Office of the Independent Adjudicator
Personalised Assessment Arrangements
Student Services Online
Glossary
109
CHAPTER 9: GOVERNANCE
This section outlines important information on academic governance structures and oversight of the
King’s academic regulatory framework. This includes the circumstances when exceptions or
exemptions can be made to the Academic Regulations as well as the emergency regulations that
may be invoked by the Principal in the case of a campus wide emergency.
The following committees of the university are responsible for maintaining the academic integrity of
a King’s award. The academic regulations are reviewed annually via following the route through the
committees. The university delegation chart is available here.
Academic Standards Sub-Committee (ASSC): The Academic Standards Sub-Committee is
responsible for advising CEC on:
• The strategic development of assessment policy and regulation.
• The level of university compliance with the assessment framework.
• The extent to which assessment policies are transparent, fair, impartial,
consistent and compliant with the values of King's.
ASSC recommends amendments to the academic regulations to CEC.
College Education Committee (CEC): CEC is the committee of Academic Board responsible
for ensuring that the academic provision for all programmes is of the highest possible
standard. CEC recommends amendments to the academic regulations to Academic Board
Academic Board: The Academic Board is the committee responsible on behalf of the
Council for the academic work of the university in teaching and examining and in research.
Academic Board approves amendments to the academic regulations.
Every taught programme of study that leads to an award and all free-standing credit bearing
modules are assigned to an Assessment Sub-Board. Each Sub-Board reports to its faculty
Assessment Board and each Faculty Assessment Board reports to ASSC.
The Postgraduate Research Student Sub-Committee, which reports to the College Research
Committee, reviews the academic regulations in Chapter 6: Framework for Postgraduate Research
Awards before they are submitted to ASSC.
Deviations from the Academic Regulations
Exceptions
9.1.
Where a cohort exemption to a specific regulation has been approved and will continue
to apply, it will be listed with the respective regulation as an ongoing exception. Any
exceptions to policy will be detailed in the respective policy document and will include
any associated conditions.
Exemptions
9.2.
Exemptions to the regulations may be considered in exceptional circumstances. Advice
should be sought from Academics Regulations, Quality & Standards.
110
9.3.
For exemption requests relating to pre-undergraduate, undergraduate or postgraduate
taught regulations, the approving authority is the Vice-Principal (Education and Student
Success) or delegate on behalf of Academic Board. All exemption requests should be
submitted via the Exemptions Procedure by the Assessment Board Chair or delegate.
Requests will be processed normally within 7 working days.
9.4.
For exemption requests relating to postgraduate research regulations, the approving
authorities are the Deputy-Deans for Doctoral Studies on behalf of Academic Board. All
exemption requests should be submitted via the PGR Exemption request form.
9.5.
For exemptions for a cohort relating to programme specifications, it is usually a condition
of approval that a programme modification form will be submitted to eliminate the need
for the same exemption request in the future.
9.6.
Any exemptions to the regulations will be reported annually to the Academic Standards
Sub-Committee and to Academic Board.
9.7.
Policies cannot be exempted. Where there is an issue with an existing academic policy,
the Academic Regulations, Quality & Standards team should be notified as soon as
possible.
Emergency Regulations
9.8.
The Principal or nominee may declare a College-wide or campus specific emergency
which will authorise the Emergency Regulations to be implemented for a prescribed
period of time.
9.9.
The Emergency Regulations provide a framework to allow progression and/or award
where performance is prevented by acts or events which may be beyond the control of
the College.
Marking during a College-wide or campus specific emergency
9.10.
In the event that marking cannot be completed in accordance with the marking model
assigned to a module, an Assessment Board may, with the approval of the Chair or
Deputy Chair of Academic Standard Sub-Committee, use an alternative marking model.
This may include relaxing some of the rules contained within the marking models.
9.11.
If External Examiners are unable to fulfil their duties, the assessment process may
proceed, with the approval of the Chair or Deputy Chair of Academic Standard Sub-
Committee.
Progression during a College-wide or campus specific emergency
9.12.
In the event that students are unable to be assessed in the original format, the method of
assessment of a module and/or the relative weighting of the assessment components, as
defined in the module specification, may be modified by the Assessment Board.
9.13.
In the event that students are unable to be assessed in any format and/or results are
unavailable for some or all students, Assessment Boards may, if appropriate, progress
students pending assessment and/or ratification at a later date, unless prohibited by a
Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body.
111
Boards during a College-wide or campus specific emergency
9.14.
In the event that the Assessment Sub-Board and/or the Assessment Board is inquorate,
the Head of Faculty, in consultation with the Chair or Deputy Chair of the Assessment
Board, may allow progression, ratify results and/or ratify awards.
9.15.
Decisions may be made using the information available to Assessment Sub-Boards and/or
Assessment Boards at the time, however the decision could be reviewed if new
information became available at a later stage which was not available at the time the
original decision made.
Research Degree considerations during a College-wide or campus specific emergency
9.16.
Thesis submission deadlines and maximum duration of study may need to be extended to
cover the period of the College-wide or campus specific emergency by the faculty Vice
Dean for Doctoral Studies.
Awards during a College-wide or campus specific emergency
9.17.
Regulations 5.43 and 6.12 will continue to apply in the event of a College-wide or campus
specific emergency. There are no exceptions to the award rules. Boundaries cannot be
lowered, and exceptions cannot be made. The method of assessment for research
degrees is by oral examination.
Policies and Contractual Documents
Terms and Conditions for Students
Student Protection Plan
Programme Closure & Suspension Policy
Faculty Governance Functions
Useful links
Exemptions process for undergraduate and postgraduate taught
Exemptions process for postgraduate research
Governance, policies and procedures
Committees Terms of Reference and Membership
Glossary