You can find the acceptable types of examinations in the examination regulations of the respective degree program.
The following groups generally have the right to administer an examination:
- all professors (including apl., honorary, guest, and junior professors)
- Private lecturers, lecturers (Sec. 51a State Higher Education Act), and assistant lecturers (Sec. 56 State Higher Education Act)
- Academic staff with the right to administer an examination (can be transferred by the Faculty if the staff member independently takes on tasks in research and teaching)
The examination committee appoints the examiners for module papers and final theses from the aforementioned groups.
The correction deadlines can be found in the respective examination regulations.
They can be found in the section regulating the written examinations.
IMPORTANT: The results of the examinations in the first examination period must be entered on HohCampus at the latest 14 calendar days before the examination date in the second examination period. If this deadline is missed, a second, later re-sit examination date must be planned. This examination must then be organized by the department / institute itself.
Permissibility of including student assistants for correcting
The responsible examiners must independently, directly, and completely take note of the students’ examinations and evaluate the examinations from their own perspective. The evaluation may not be delegated to another person, and the evaluations of third parties may not be seen as binding.
The examiner may obtain the assistance of others (assistants for correcting), but the following must be observed:
Including assistants for correcting is permissible if the pre-correction essentially means carrying out the instructions of the examiner (= non-independent assistance).
This condition is met if the evaluation criteria are almost entirely given by the examiner so that their application does not allow for others’ leeway in judgment, or only to a minimal extent. In this case, the examiner does not need to independently assess the assistant’s corrections of the examination. Prevailing jurisprudence only recognizes the permissibility of such non-independent assistance in the mathematics and in multiple-choice examinations.
In other cases, the pre-correction by the assistance may not replace the evaluation by the responsible examiner. The examiner is obligated to make his own evaluation of the content of the examinations. It is never permissible for the examiner to fully entrust the expertise and reliability of third parties or to allow himself to only be convinced by the arguments of an assistant. The examiner must completely review the examination and evaluate it independently.
These regulations apply to examinations that are relevant for the career choice (Art. 12(1) Basic Law). It does not apply to student work that is only evaluated as an exercise.
Qualification of the assistants for corrections
The assistants for corrections must have a qualification at least equivalent to the examination they are correcting (in a Bachelor’s program a related Bachelor’s degree, and in a Master’s program a related Master’s degree).
Uniform application of evaluation standards
For examinations with multiple choice questions, the answer possibilities and the evaluation standard are set in advance. There is no leeway for the correction assistants. With this standard, the consistency of the evaluation standards is guaranteed.
In other cases, the examiner must ensure that the examinations are corrected with a uniform evaluation standard. He must give clear instructions for pre-correction. Since the examiner must completely review all examinations after a pre-correction and evaluate them independently, any deviations in pre-corrections by various correction assistants can be eliminated by the examiner’s independent evaluation.
The evaluation of a written examination must be reasoned in writing. In the reasoning, the examination must describe the relevant considerations that led to the evaluation of the examination. It can be brief but must make it possible for the student to understand the reasoning.
You can find information on grading and the calculation of grades in the examination regulations of the respective degree program.
In general, the following grading scale applies for all Bachelor’s and Master's programs (except for SAIWAM):
| 1 | very good | outstanding performance |
| 2 | good | performance that is significantly above the average requirements |
| 3 | satisfactory | performance that corresponds to the average requirements |
| 4 | pass | performance that is sufficient to satisfy the requirements despite its shortcomings |
| 5 | fail | performance that does not meet the requirements due to significant deficiencies |
For differentiated evaluations, when grading coursework and examinations as well as the Master’s thesis, the following additional grades are permissible:
very good (1.3); good (1.7); good (2.3); satisfactory (2.7); satisfactory (3.3); pass (3.7).
For examinations and coursework that are organized by the Examinations Office
The grades for all exams are to be entered via HohCampus in the "Grade Entry/List of Participants" function.
Instructions can be found on the KIM Forms and Instructions page.
Once grades are approved in HohCampus, they are available for students to view. The Examinations Office strongly advises against additionally posting the examination results in the department / institute due to data protection concerns.
For coursework that is organized by the institute / department
The grades of all exams are to be entered via HohCampus in the "Grade Entry/List of Participants" function.
If students have completed coursework without registration, please inform the Examinations Office about the result informally.
Examinations
The departments are responsible for retaining the examinations (written examinations, seminar papers, final theses, etc.). The examination protocols are sent to the Examinations Office and retained there.
For examinations that are part of the Bachelor’s, Master’s, or Diplom examination and whose grades are part of the total grade, the following rule of thumb applies:
- Bachelor's program: The examinations must be retained for 7 years starting with the examination date.
- Master’s program: The examinations must be saved for 6 years as of the examination date.
Examinations should be retained for at least two years and a maximum of five years as of the issuance of the degree certificate (Bachelor’s, Master’s or Diplom certificate).
Depending on the semester in which the examination is held according to the curriculum and depending on the final deadline set for completing studies in the examination regulations, there are therefore differing standards for how long examination documents need to be retained.
Example:
Calculating the length of retention in a Bachelor’s program:
According to the curriculum the examination is to be taken in the 2nd subject-related semester.
According to the examination regulations, the Bachelor’s degree must be completed at the latest by the 9th subject-related semester, otherwise the students lose their right of admission to an examination.
In this case, the deadline is calculated as followed:
Minimum period of retention:
4.5 years (=9 semesters) - 1 year (=2 semesters) + 5 years = 8.5 years
If you hold to the timeframe in the rule of thumb mentioned, you will not have to individually calculate the period of retention and will be within the legal timeframe for retention.
Preliminary work
Preliminary work can be destroyed after one semester or returned to the students insofar as they are not relevant for further examination procedures and are not taken into consideration in the module grade.
Second reviewer copies
Copies of final theses that are submitted for the second reviewer can be returned to the students after the completion of the examination proceedings if these copies do not contain notes relevant to the grade.
Further details:
ZENDAS - Central Data Protection Office for Baden-Württemberg Universities (Zentrale Datenschutzstelle der baden-württembergischen Universitäten)
The deadlines for inspecting exams are set down in the respective examination regulations.
In principle, however, the following regulations apply:
Eligibility:
Every student is entitled to inspect written examination papers and reviews. Inspection by an authorized representative (e.g. appointed lawyer) is permitted. The representative must present a written power of attorney and identify himself/herself.
Timing:
Inspection shall be provided within a reasonable time frame after the results of the examination have been announced. This means that students must be given the opportunity to view the examination papers before the re-take examination.
Supervision:
The inspection of the original documents may only take place under supervision so that the examination results cannot be changed.
Notes | Copies:
During the inspection, the examinee may take notes without restriction. At the exam review appointment, the department may refuse to permit copies to be made. However, copies must be allowed in formal opposition proceedings.
Explanations:
If the examinee can understand how the assessment was made on the basis of the correction notes in the examination paper, additional explanations are not required at the inspection meeting. If the correction notes are concise and do not say much, additional explanations are required during the inspection.
Regardless of this, it is always a good idea to explain the assessment again at the time of inspection, as this can avoid the lengthy appeal and court proceedings.
Further information for examiners of the WiSo Faculty:
The examination board for the business and economics programs has defined key points for the examination reviews. You can view them in the following document: Key points for exam inspections
Objections:
If students do not agree with the assessment, they can demand that the examiner reconsider their assessment decision by submitting specific objections.
Students may assert their claim for reconsideration of the examination decision either informally vis-à-vis the examiner or within the framework of a formal appeal procedure. Students must submit an appeal in writing to the Examinations Office.
The claim for reconsideration of the assessment decision must in any case be asserted before the expiration of the objection period. The time limit for an objection depends on the manner in which the examination result is announced:
- The objection period is one month from the date of notification of the examination result if the results of the exam were given in writing with instructions on how to appeal. This procedure is usually chosen by the Examinations Office for students who have failed an examination.
- The objection period is one year from the date of notification of the examination result if the results of the exam were given electronically or on a notice board without instructions on how to appeal.
Response to objections:
For informal objections: If the examinee raises specific objections to the grade, the examiner must address the examinee's objections and review the grade again.
The examinee should receive timely feedback on the examiner's decision with a rationale for the decision. If the examiner gives oral feedback, it is recommended that the rationale be recorded in a brief written note on the exam.
In the formal appeal procedure, the examiner is requested by the Examinations Office on behalf of the Examination Committee to comment on the objections raised by the examinee and to review the assessment decision again. The Examination Committee will then decide, based on the examiner's statement, whether to uphold the appeal.
Legal basis:
The above-mentioned recommendations are based on the provisions of the State Administrative Procedure Act (LVwVfG), the Administrative Court Code (VwGO), and current case law. The respective examination regulations are also always decisive.