Student Assessment

Policy Statement

Purpose and Intent

MIECAT is committed to ensuring that all students are treated fairly and equitably. This policy outlines the principles and process for assessment of student work.


  • To establish a framework for the timely submission and assessment of student work.
  • To clearly communicate the responsibilities of student and institute staff in relation to student assessments.


This policy applies to all students enrolled at MIECAT.

Policy Provisions


MIECAT assessment carries a strong awareness that assessment of student work is part of MIECAT’s ethical contribution to the development of professions which have particular public roles in the fields of health and wellbeing, community mental health, community arts, community development and education. Therefore MIECAT has a commitment to the development of creative arts practitioners with high levels of academic competence and self-knowledge, commitment to social and ethical values, emotional wellbeing, self-management and resilience, a capacity to deal with conflict and commitment to assisting people to make sense of their lives.

Grading – AQF 8 subjects

GradeCut-off Parameters
Credit70% - 84%
Pass50% - 69%
UG PassSubject ungraded
ResubmitInsufficient evidence (less than 50%)
FailUnsatisfactory resubmission or failure to submit (less than 50%)

Grading –All AQF 9 and 10 subjects

All assessment tasks at AQF 9 or 10 for example progress reports, arts project papers, peer and self-assessments will be assessed as follows: Ungraded (UG) Pass, or Resubmit or Fail.

Assessment Responsibilities and Guidelines – Students

Students must ensure they are enrolled (i.e. fees are paid) when any assignments are submitted for marking. Students not enrolled (or with fees outstanding) will not have their assignments assessed.

Students must keep a hard copy of each assignment submitted.

Assignments are expected to be submitted on time, and if a one week extension is required a request must be submitted in writing to MIECAT administration at least 72 hours before the due date for that assignment. Reasons for extension should be included along with any relevant documentation.

If an extension is granted students should be aware that the timelines for marking described below may not be met. This may jeopardise re-enrolment in a subsequent subject where there are subject prerequisites.

If a student experiences a medical or family emergency or serious ill health then a request for special consideration may be made in writing to the chair of the MIECAT Education Committee. This must be done 72 hours before the assignment due date. In such cases a longer extension may be granted to the student. Medical or other appropriate certificates/letters must accompany this request, and the chair of the Education Committee will respond to the student within 2 working days.

If an assignment is submitted beyond the agreed due by date for submission the assignment (at AQF 8 level) will not be graded. Satisfactory assignments will be only given a pass grade and assignments that do not provide sufficient evidence will be graded as a resubmit.

Students must ensure that all assignments and parts of assignments are be paginated, with their name on each page and to include a MIECAT assignment cover sheet that indicates the assignment task, the staff responsible for assessment the student’s name and number, and a signed statement of authorship. Any journals submitted as a part of the assessment must also have a cover sheet attached to the journal.

Doctoral students must ensure that they adhere to the MIECAT protocols for the submission of externally assessed theses.

Assessment protocols for hurdle subjects

*Students who receive a PASS grade for hurdle subjects will be invited to meet with a Progressions Panel (Academic Review Team) to consider academic performance across the four hurdle subjects and progression into the stream subjects. The Panel will consist of 1 teacher of a subject/s in which the student received a PASS grade, the subject/s or Masters co-ordinator, and another academic staff member. The process is as follows:

  • Once the hurdle assessments (Unit 3: Engaging with materials; Unit 4: Emergent inquiry; Unit 5: Patterns of Emotional experiencing; Unit 6: Refining companioning skills) have been completed, students achieving a PASS grade in any of these subjects will be invited to meet with the Progressions Panel.

  • The Progressions Panel will consider the students’ overall past academic performance. Students may attend the panel, and may present additional information if they choose.

  • The Progressions Panel will then confer to reach a decision about progression of the student. A written response to the student will then be formulated by the Progressions Panel outlining the details of their decision, the reasons behind it, and options available to the student

  • There are four possible options for students who receive a PASS grade for hurdle subjects as follows:

    1. The Progressions Panel decides the student may progress into the stream subjects with consideration to any recommendations from the Progression Panel.

    2. The Progressions Panel decides the student may not progress. The student may choose to EITHER exit the program with a Graduate Diploma, OR defer their study and return to repeat relevant hurdle subjects/s in the following year. The relevant subject/s may only be repeated once and are not covered by Fee-help.

    If the student chooses to repeat a relevant hurdle subject/s in the following year and they achieve a CREDIT grade or higher in repeated subjects, they will progress into the stream subjects.

    4. If the student chooses to repeat relevant hurdle subject/s in the following year and they do not achieve the required CREDIT grade or higher, they must exit the program with a Graduate Diploma.

This progression process is only applicable in the year the subject is assessed. That is, it is not retrospective

Request for Remark

Students may request a re-marking of their assignment if they believe a higher grading is warranted. The procedure is as follows:

  • Students will be required to put in writing to the subject coordinator a request for a remark, outlining the reasons for the request. In addition, the student will be asked to include a copy of the marked assignment and any feedback associated with this assignment – this is to be done within 3 weeks of receiving the assessment/feedback.

  • This request will be considered by the subject coordinator and the chair of the MIECAT Education Committee and a decision will be made as to whether the assignment will be remarked.

  • The student will then be advised of the decision within a week and if there is
    agreement that a remark is appropriate the student will be required to send an unmarked copy of the assignment to the subject co-coordinator and this will be forwarded on to an independent MIECAT marker

  • The chair of Education Committee will consider both the first assessment and the re mark grade and feedback and assign a final grade for that assignment.

  • A resubmission can be done once only for each subject. A resubmission may be in the form of written work, oral presentation or other methods deemed suitable in order to assess the learning outcomes.

Progress Review

  • All students who receive a grade lower than a credit will be expected to participate in a progress review with the subject co-ordinator at the completion of the subject. This review will aim to identify learning challenges and strategies to support students in their studies.

  • Students who are not satisfied with the deliberations and decisions of the assessment processes outlined above will be directed to the MIECAT Grievance Policy should they wish to take further action.

Progress Review
Assessment Responsibilities and Guidelines – Staff

On enrolment all students will be given a copy of the MIECAT assessment policy.

At the commencement of each subject (or year in the case of the Professional Doctorate) students MUST be provided with a copy of the assignment/assessment tasks, the assessment criteria, assessment protocols assignment submission, the word limits and the assignment submission dates.

It is the responsibility of teaching staff to allocate time within the subject to discuss and respond to questions related to the assessment tasks.

All assignments that are submitted at or before the due by date will be returned to students within a month of the submission date unless advised otherwise.

Staff will not be required to comply with this timeline if an assignment is late or the student has an extension.

Staff are expected to attend any designated marking days and participate in assessment moderation.

Assessment is based on the learning outcomes defined for each of the subjects.

Subject co-ordinators must ensure that all assignments that have insufficient evidence of meeting the learning outcomes (i.e. a resubmission) are assessed by two staff before the assignment is returned to the student. A resubmission requires an overall lack of evidence for the assessment task. Each subject generally at AQF levels 8 and 9 have two assessment tasks and each task must achieve at least a pass grade to gain a subject pass.

The subject coordinator in consultation with the teaching staff will determine an appropriate resubmission by the student. A resubmission may be in the form of written work, oral presentation or other methods deemed suitable to assess the learning outcomes.

Following a resubmission, if the assessor deems this to be a fail, then the subject co-ordinator must ensure that the assessment is double marked. If there is a marking discrepancy the final mark will be an average of the two grades.

MIECAT office staff are responsible for acknowledging receipt of a student request for an extension and notifying the student that an extension has or has not been granted.

The subject co-ordinator is responsible for ensuring that any student who is not satisfied with the outcome of the assessment process is directed to either the relevant section of this policy where students can apply for a remark of their assignment or the MIECAT Grievance Procedures.

If an assignment is submitted late beyond the agreed due by date for submission staff will assess as either a pass grade or a resubmit.

Assessment of Doctoral Theses – External
Thesis examination

The Education Committee will appoint 2 external examiners for the thesis. The academic practice of using examiners who have a qualification equal to or above the level being examined will be adhered to.

If the 2 examiners cannot concur, the third examiner will be invited to assess the thesis.

The Education Committee will meet once all examination is complete and forward the results and a recommendation regarding the conferring of the award to the MIECAT Academic Programs Director.

Exegesis and Arts Presentation

In the case of the exegesis and art work submission 2 external examiners will be required to attend the candidate’s arts presentation/performance/event and present their assessment of this and the accompanying exegesis to the Education Committee. The arts presentation and exegesis must be completed and assessed at the same time.

The Education Committee will meet once all examination is complete and forward the results and a recommendation regarding the conferring of the award to the MIECAT academic programs director.


Approval Authority

Academic Board

Approval Date

21 February 2021

Policy Owner

Education Committee

Responsibility for Implementation

The Education Committee is responsible for overseeing the overall implementation of the Institute’s Student Assessment Policy and providing guidance in the management of grievances.

Responsibility for Monitoring Implementation and Compliance

Education Committee and Academic Board are responsible for monitoring and reporting to the MIECAT Council.