Coronavirus Recovery: advice and latest information

These regulations are applicable to candidates pursuing undergraduate, postgraduate taught and research programmes of study.  

1.    Definition

An Aegrotat award is an award without classification that may be conferred upon a candidate on the presumption that the candidate, who is unable to continue their studies, would have satisfied the standard required for the award had they been able to continue.

2.     Introduction

2.1

A specially convened sub-board of the University Progression and Award Board shall consider applications from Faculties/Schools for the award of an Aegrotat degree, diploma or certificate. The sub-board shall be referred to as an Aegrotat/Posthumous Board.

2.2

Aegrotat awards may be made in accordance with the Regulations for the award listed below.

2.3

For undergraduate and postgraduate taught students, the Aegrotat award will normally correspond to the level of study which is interrupted. Such an award is contingent on there being sufficient evidence that had the study not been interrupted, the student would have completed the level in question. In the absence of such evidence, the Aegrotat award will be the relevant exit award for the body of study completed. 

2.4

An Aegrotat research degree shall not normally be awarded unless a candidate has submitted a thesis and has been assessed by means of an oral examination (viva). Each case shall be considered on its own merit.

2.5

An Aegrotat degree, diploma or certificate shall be unclassified and, in all other respects, un-graded. An Aegrotat award does not necessarily entitle the holder to registration with a professional body, or be exempt from the requirements of any professional qualification which might otherwise be associated with the programme of study concerned.

Candidates pursuing professional programmes in health care who are subsequently awarded an Aegrotat degree, diploma or certificate will not be eligible for professional health care registration.

2.6

An Aegrotat degree shall normally be a named award except in those cases where professional body requirements dictate that a named award is not appropriate. The full degree title of an Aegrotat award shall be considered as part of the procedures for considering the award and shall be made known to the candidate prior to his/her acceptance of the award.

3.     Regulations for the Award

3.1

The request for the award of an Aegrotat award may be made by the candidate or, where a candidate is unable to prepare or submit a request, by the Faculty/School. All requests shall be submitted to the Director of Academic Services. 

3.2

The candidate shall be required to indicate that they are willing to accept an Aegrotat award. Where a candidate is unwilling to accept an Aegrotat award, they shall be permitted to complete the examination or assessment in question by the approved subsequent date.

3.3

The Faculty/School shall consider relevant evidence which shall include satisfactory medical certification in the case of illness, or appropriate documentation in other cases, and establish the facts of the candidate’s case.

3.4

The Faculty/School must be satisfied that:

  • the candidate is unlikely to be able to return to complete their study at a later date, and
  • that the candidate’s prior performance demonstrates that they would have passed but for the illness/event which occurred.

4.     Procedure and Guidelines for making the Award

4.1

All cases shall be considered, in the first instance, by the Faculty/School. The Faculty/School shall be charged with obtaining as much information as possible on the causes which prevented the candidate from attempting the whole or part of the assessment(s), together with evidence of the prospects of the candidate completing the assessment(s) in a subsequent year within the time-limit prescribed by the regulations.

 4.2

When supporting evidence is received from a medical practitioner outside the University, it is desirable that the Occupational Health Department and/or suitably qualified practitioner, as specified by the University, be asked to undertake full consultation with the practitioner concerned before any recommendation is made on behalf of a candidate.

 4.3

The Faculty/School shall make a recommendation to the appropriate Aegrotat Board on each case. The recommendation shall include:

  • details of the academic standing of the candidate
  • details on the causes which prevented the candidate from attempting the whole or part of the assessment(s)
  • details of medical evidence or other appropriate documentation
  • recommendation from the Occupational Health Department and/or other suitably qualified practitioner, as specified by the University (if appropriate)
  • evidence on the prospects of the candidate completing the assessment(s) in a subsequent year within the time-limit
  • a recommendation on the title of the Aegrotat Award if it is not considered appropriate for the award to be named
  • a signed statement from the candidate indicating that they are willing to accept an Aegrotat degree

4.4 

The Aegrotat Board shall consist of three members, normally the Chair of the University Progression and Awards Board (or nominee) and two other members of the Board. A representative from the Occupational Health Department and/or other suitably qualified practitioner, as specified by the University, shall be required to attend the meeting of the Aegrotat Board.

 4.5

The Aegrotat Board shall consider all evidence available to it and make a recommendation to the University Progression and Awards Board.

4.6 

The University Progression and Awards Board shall approve or not approve the award. The decision shall be conveyed to the candidate and reported to the appropriate Faculty/School.

5.     Reporting, Monitoring, Evaluation and Review

5.1

The Aegrotat Board shall make a report to the University Progression and Awards Board on all Aegrotat Awards.

 5.2

It shall be the responsibility of the Academic Regulations and Cases Board to review the Regulations for the Award of Aegrotat Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates and their effectiveness, and make recommendations for changes, where appropriate, to be considered by the Learning Teaching and Quality Committee.