Common use of Grading Policy Clause in Contracts

Grading Policy. II.2.11.1. Mutual recognition and ‘jointness’ (a) Systematic use of the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) to define Programme’s unit modules, to recognize Learning Outcomes, and ultimately to allow COSI to be an easily readable and comparable degree to increase Student’s competitiveness and employability; (b) Shared examination methodologies and performance assessment criteria. In addition, efforts are made through continuous dialogue to tackle cultural differences between Full Partners faculty with respect to expectations linked to a given mark. For instance, the evaluation process of the Master Thesis, which is conducted by an international jury of at least 2 different faculty members and one external professional of the given field of research; (c) While each Full Partners must apply the grading scale in accordance with national and institutional regulations at the institution responsible for the delivery of the unit module, the development of a common grading table with guidelines must serve as a reference to compare grading scales directly and state on the successful completion of the Programme. This procedure will be transparent as institutional and ECTS grading scales will be available with the Student transcripts from each institution, and (d) Recognized awarded degrees, local diploma supplements and common Diploma Supplement. II.2.11.2. Common grading scale guidelines and correspondence

Grading Policy. II.2.11.1. Mutual recognition and ‘jointness’ (a) Systematic use of the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) to define Programme’s unit modules, to recognize Learning Outcomes, and ultimately to allow COSI PSRS to be an easily readable and comparable degree to increase Student’s competitiveness and employability; (b) Shared examination methodologies and performance assessment criteria. In addition, efforts are made through continuous dialogue to tackle cultural differences between Full Partners faculty with respect to expectations linked to a given mark. For instance, the evaluation process of the Master Thesis, which is conducted by an international jury of at least 2 different faculty members and one external professional of the given field of research; (c) While each Full Partners Partner must apply the grading scale in accordance with national and institutional regulations at the institution responsible for the delivery of the unit module, the development of a common grading table with guidelines must serve as a reference to compare grading scales directly and state on the successful completion of the Programme. This procedure will be transparent as institutional and ECTS grading scales will be available with the Student transcripts from each institution, and (d) Recognized awarded degrees, local diploma supplements and common Diploma Supplement. II.2.11.2. Common grading scale guidelines and correspondence