Following a report published in sections of the media in connection with the Commissioner of Education’s conclusions regarding a complaint filed by a student who read for a Master’s degree, the University of Malta (UM) would like to clarify a number of points:
In summary, the case involves a postgraduate student who felt aggrieved with the final mark which he had obtained in his dissertation. Rather than following procedure and filing for a revision of paper, the student proceeded with filing a complaint directly with the Commissioner of Education.
The Commissioner concluded that two members of the Board of Examiners did not possess the required academic competence and expertise with regard to the subject matter, and this led to the student receiving a rather low overall mark for the dissertation. The Commissioner also made recommendations for the reconstitution of the Examiners’ Board, and that the student be given a second chance at sitting for his viva examination.
In its submission, UM disagreed with the assertion made by the Commissioner of Education: that two of the three members of the Examination Board did not possess the adequate academic competence in the respective subject area. For the record, UM’s regulations dictate that an external examiner is nominated to sit on an Examination Board - as was the case for this dissertation. UM also pointed out that the student failed to follow the correct procedure, and that the nomination of the Examiners’ Board falls within the remit of the University’s Senate.
Furthermore, the final report submitted by the Commissioner reached UM only two weeks before graduation. Had the recommendations been taken on board, and assuming that the new Examinations Board would have awarded a pass mark to the student, he would have had to wait until March 2023 to graduate. In any case, the student graduated in March this year.
For transparency’s sake, UM is hereby computing two scenarios which reflect the outcome of the student’s final grade in the event that the entire Examinations’ Board would have awarded him the same mark as the member of the Board, who in the Commissioner’s opinion was fully-competent to evaluate the dissertation.
Scenario 1 (Final Marks as awarded to student)
Dissertation (70 ECTS) – 55 overall mark: 3850
Marks obtained for other Modules (20 ECTS): 1500
Total Marks: 5350
Final Average Mark: 59.4, which is equivalent to a Pass
Scenario 2 (Final Mark in Dissertation reflecting the highest mark awarded by one examiner)
Dissertation (70 ECTS) – 63.4 overall mark: 4438
Marks obtained for other Modules (20 ECTS): 1500
Total Marks: 5938
Final Average Mark: 66, which is also equivalent to a Pass
The above computations clearly reveal that the overall classification which is included on the graduation scroll remains the same in both scenarios.
While considering this case to be closed, UM reiterates its commitment to keep on working with the Office of the Commissioner of Education, which it holds in high esteem.
