Grade submissions

Grade on the correct attempt tab using the exam type rating mode and ruleset schema — with attempt walkthroughs, eligibility states, and examiner edge cases.

Grading happens on an exam’s attempt tabs — each attempt the exam allows gets its own tab where you review and grade individual student submissions. This is the formal assessment record for the module sitting: marks here feed published results, attempt progression, and institutional reporting — not the course grade grid in FuxamLMS.

You grade with the control dictated by the exam type’s rating mode (graded, pass or fail, or participation), and for graded exams the available values come from the institution rating schema linked through the student’s academic ruleset. Attempt tabs themselves come from resolved module-level max attempts; see How exam attempts work for how failure, resit, and reassessment map onto those tabs.

Why it matters

Accurate, timely grading is the bridge between examination and academic record. Universities need:

• Consistent scales across modules that share the same ruleset
• Clear separation of staff-only notes from student-visible results
• Attempt-aware marking so a second sitting does not overwrite the first
• Bulk tools when cohorts are large but rating modes match
• Correct treatment of withdrawn, unable, or on-leave students (not force-graded)

Mistakes that ship to publish are hard to unwind — published grades and notes typically lock. Treat unpublished grades as the place for careful review. How those marks combine into a module grade is explained in Module grade calculation.

How it fits

Key concepts

Before you grade

Confirm the exam type’s rating mode — this determines the grading control you see:

See Configure grading scale for how rating modes and schemas work.

Also confirm:

• You are on the correct Attempt tab for the sitting you intend to mark
• Secondary examiners only open students assigned to them under Examinee responsibles
• Open exam requests that would change eligibility or timing are resolved
• You understand whether the exam type uses auto reattempt or reassessment period (How exam attempts work)

Grade a submission

Submission and eligibility states

Grading scale behavior

• Graded exams use rating schemas defined at the institution level (Settings → OrgHub → Exam Center → Rating Schemas). The effective schema for a student may come from their academic ruleset.
• Pass or fail and Participation modes use fixed pass/fail or attended/not-attended options — no letter or numeric schema is required.
• You cannot grade submissions for students who have withdrawn, are unable to take the exam, or are on leave for the term.

Attempt walkthroughs

Attempt 1 — first sitting

Open Attempt 1, grade the cohort, leave notes for borderline cases, but do not publish until calibration is done. Students who fail may become eligible for Attempt 2 depending on limits and workflow — that is attempt accounting, not a reason to edit Attempt 1 after the fact once published.

Attempt 2 — resit under auto reattempt

After a failed Attempt 1, under auto reattempt and while under the failed-attempt ceiling, grade the student on Attempt 2. My Exams may show usage such as 2/3. Never enter the resit mark on the Attempt 1 tab.

Attempt 2 — reassessment period

Under reassessment period, confirm the student has reassessment approval (Handle exam requests) before treating Attempt 2 as an active sitting. There is no Attempt 3+ under this workflow.

Multi-exam module — keep attempt numbers aligned

If the module also requires another exam, remember: the module completes only when all required exams pass at the same term and attempt number. Grading one exam to pass on Attempt 1 while the sibling exam remains failed or ungraded does not complete the module. Weighting across requirements is covered in Module grade calculation.

Permanent failure

When failed attempts for the module are exhausted, the student is permanently failed. Do not invent an extra attempt tab as a workaround — see How exam attempts work and Configure attempt limits.

Examiner edge case — secondary assignment missing

If a secondary examiner cannot open a student, fix Examinee responsibles on Details before the grading deadline. Bulk grading will not bypass missing examinee assignment.

Worked example — German numeric scale

A written module exam uses Graded with a value-based schema from 1.0 (very good) through 4.0 (sufficient) to 5.0 (fail). The examiner opens Attempt 1, selects 2.3 for a student, adds an internal note about borderline criteria, and saves. The student still sees nothing until publish. If the mark is 5.0 and the exam type uses auto reattempt, the student may later appear on Attempt 2 while under the failed-attempt ceiling.

CMS vs LMS grading

Best practices

• Start from Pending when catching up. It surfaces ungraded work across attempts so nothing sits forgotten on Attempt 2.
• Calibrate before bulk grading. Agree on the shared mark with co-examiners, then apply bulk actions only when rows share the same rating mode.
• Keep notes internal and factual. Staff notes are not student feedback; use them for handovers and appeals context.
• Do not grade ineligible students. Withdrawn, unable, or on-leave statuses should stay ungraded rather than forced through.
• Publish as a separate decision. Saving a grade does not release it — see Publish grades.
• Check attempt usage. Indicators such as 2/3 help you avoid treating a final allowed sitting casually.

Common pitfalls

FAQ

Related pages