notes

1. Post Assessment Moderation Form
Internal Moderator and External Examiners form for Examination and Assessment Scripts
1
PART 
SECTION B: Partner Institution’s Peer Moderator
Peer Moderator’s Comments
(B1) Comments on Coursework:
INTI Subang:
Fair marking and fair comments given by the lecturer. No adjustment needed.
INTI Penang:
INTI KL:
Majority of students relied heavily on online resources which are not from academic materials.
Thus, it is questionable whether the citation from these online non-academic materials are reliable.
There are differences ranging from 5-12 marks (100% as base) after the moderation.
(2nd reviewer)
It was found that in general the 2 group assignments reviewed has satisfactory depthless and breadth
in their analysis, evaluation and assessment to address the different issues mentioned in the mini
scenarios. Specifically students were able to present some facts, figures and examples to defend
their recommendations in order to help overcome or address the issues faced by GWR. I would
recommend to maintain the coursework marks.
As for the individual assignment , the literature review which carries 20% can be further improve if
additional clarity and depth were provided in discussing the relevant issues. Similarly on the
evaluation and analysis section which carries 40% , even though student show ability to discuss it
lack strong support and arguments to back up their recommendation. There is a difference range of
marks from 6 to 12 marks between 1st marker and moderator with 4 scripts sample having a
difference between 9 to 12 marks. I agreed with moderator marks and therefore would recommend
a reduction of 7 marks only for individual assignment.
INTI Sabah:
Fair marking and fair comments given by the lecturer. No adjustment needed.
Overall:
(B2) Comments on Final Exam: (if applicable)
INTI Subang:
INTI Penang:
INTI KL:
INTI Sabah:

2. Post Assessment Moderation Form
Internal Moderator and External Examiners form for Examination and Assessment Scripts
2
Overall:
Name of
Moderator(s):
Ng Huey Miin/ Mr.Ihsan Mahmood (2nd reviewer)
Date Seen: 14/8/15 / 03/09/2015
Marks Approved ?
Key: Y= Yes N =
No
Coursework Final Exam
Marks Approved ?
Key: Y= Yes N =
No
(Second Review)
Coursework Final Exam
If not approved,
please make
recommendations:
(B3) Partner Institution’s Pre-Board Actions: (if required)
Campus Lecturer : Date
Please TICK () ONE of the following:
. Recommendation by moderator accepted by lecturer and adjusted accordingly.
Recommendation by moderator not accepted by lecturer and chair’s action required.
Comments by campus lecturer if recommendations not accepted: (Please state here)
Chair’s Action:
As both reviewers feel the marks for individual assignment from IICKL was generously marked, the
marks for this component should be reduced by 7 marks as proposed.

3. Post Assessment Moderation Form
Internal Moderator and External Examiners form for Examination and Assessment Scripts
3
SECTION C: UH Moderator
UH Moderator’s Comments:
(C1) Comments on Coursework:
(C2) Comments on Final Exam: (if applicable)
Name of Moderator:
Date Seen:
Marks Approved ?
Key: Y= Yes N =
No
Coursework Final Exam
If not approved,
please make
recommendations:

4. Post Assessment Moderation Form
Internal Moderator and External Examiners form for Examination and Assessment Scripts
4
SECTION D: External Examiner
External Examiner’s Comments:
(C1) Comments on Coursework:
(C2) Comments on Final Exam: (if any)
Name of Examiner:
Date Seen:
Marks Approved ?
Key: Y= Yes N =
No
Coursework Final Exam
If not approved,
please make
recommendations: