Assessment

Continous Assessment Activities

Title	Weighting	Hours	ECTS	Learning Outcomes
Final exam	50%	4	0.16	1, 2, 14, 3, 5, 22, 7, 8, 9, 16, 10, 11, 6, 4, 12, 13, 17, 15, 18, 20, 21, 19, 23, 24
Preparation and participation in class	10%	1	0.04	1, 2, 14, 3, 5, 22, 7, 8, 9, 16, 10, 11, 6, 4, 12, 13, 17, 15, 18, 20, 21, 19, 23, 24
Text commentary 20% Group Presentation 20%	40%	2.5	0.1	1, 2, 14, 3, 5, 22, 7, 8, 9, 16, 10, 11, 6, 4, 12, 13, 17, 15, 18, 20, 21, 19, 23, 24

The Department of Philosophy agreed that the subjects of the first semester would have two periods of concentration of evaluation activities and a week in which students could prepare specifically for the tests in the modality that each teacher will specify at the beginning of the course.

The dates for the review week and in which the tests will be concentrated are:

27 Oct.- 31 Oct.: review week or tutorials (one class will be dedicated to doing a self-evaluation questionnaire and the other class to reviewing doubts about the content and evaluation of the subject)

3 Nov. -7 Nov.: evaluation week

8-9-12-13-14 January: evaluation week

Erasmus students who request to advance an exam must present the teacher with a written document from their home university justifying their request.

The assessment of the course is continued and presupposes the attendance in class and the constant follow-up of the course. To pass the course, the final exam must be at least 5. If a student does not meet this condition, they must be submitted for reassessment. Any student, however, may be submitted to the re-assessment to increase the exam grades. The date of the final exam will coincide with the last day of classes.

										
										
																						
										
											The commentary and the group presentation are not subject to re-evaluation in any case. 

The student who has only carried out evaluation activities with a value of less than 30% will be assessed as non-evaluable.
										
																					
There is no second call.
										
																					
										
											The teacher will assign a day, hour and place of review of examination once they have evaluated the activities of the course and have put the global mark of qualification. The students that have to do the re-evaluation will have a specific day of review once they have done the aforementioned re-evaluation activity.
										
																					
										
											Exam, text commentary and group presentation. The exam will consist of answering a question and elaborating a text commentary, according to the guidelines explained and worked in class and which is the basis of the group presentation.

Participation in class. Since the subject is formed as a seminar, the teacher will value the active participation in the class beyond the mandatory exposition. Prepare classes at home, expand content, make contributions, etc. These are activities that, apart from the value they have in the course evaluation, will help to round out the note.

SINGLE EVALUATION

Evidences: Exam (consisting of a question to be answered and a text commentary), Text commentary referring to oneof the texts included in the dossier, and Comparative Reading Exercise. All three evidences will be delivered on the same date.

Grade of evidences: Exam 50%, Text commentary 25% and Comparative Reading Exercise 25%.

  In the event that tests or exams cannot be taken onsite, they will be adapted to an online format made available through the UAB’s virtual tools (original weighting will be maintained). Homework, activities and class participation will be carried out through forums, wikis and/or discussion on Teams, etc. Lecturers will ensure that studentsare able to access these virtual tools, or will offer them feasible alternatives.

  In the event of a student committing any irregularity that may lead to a significant variation in the grade awarded to an assessment activity, the student will be given a zero for this activity,
  regardless of any disciplinaryprocess that may take place. In the event of several irregularities in assessment activities of the same subject, the student willbe given a zero as the final grade for this subject.

This subject allows the use of AI technologies exclusively for support tasks such as [***bibliographic or content-based searches, text correction or translations, where applicable].
In the case of subjects in a Modern Languages degree, use of translation must be specifically authorised by the teacher. Other specific situations may be contemplated, as deemed appropriate by the teacher.
The student must clearly (i) identify which parts have been generated using AI technology; (ii) specify the tools used; and (iii) include a critical reflection on how these have influenced the process and final outcome of the activity.
Lack of transparency regarding the use of AI in the assessed activity will be considered academic dishonesty; the corresponding grade may be lowered, or the work may even be awarded a zero.
In cases of greater infringement, more serious action may be taken.