After exams

You will find your grade on Studentweb. If you want to ask for an explanation of your grade or appeal against a grade you will find useful information here.

Assessments, grades and results

You will find your results on Studentweb, under Access > Results.
The deadline for announcing results is normally three weeks after the exam.

Candidates at NLA University College are assessed on a grading scale where A to E are pass marks and F is a fail mark. In addition, the grades pass/fail and approved/not approved are sometimes used. The grading scale and assessment criteria have been prepared by the Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions and apply to all higher education in Norway, but some subjects have additional grade criteria.

If a candidate takes the same exam/assessment several times, the best grade will apply.

Current and former students (students after 1999) can order a grade transcript on Studentweb. Log in with your 11-digit national ID number and your PIN or Feide log-in. If you have forgotten your PIN, this can be sent from Studentweb to the email address we have registered for you. You update your email address on Studentweb yourself, so you can be sure that the transcript is sent to the right address.

You will find additional information about the grading scale at the bottom of this page.

Explanation of grade

Students may ask for an explanation of the grades assigned to their written work within one week of the results being announced. A request for a result explanation must be made in writing, using the correct form, and is to be sent to the study administration. The explanation will be provided as soon as possible, normally within two weeks. However, this may take slightly longer due to holiday periods. 

The form for applying for an explanation of the result can be found here: Request for result explanation.

In the case of a verbal assessment or an evaluation of practical skills, any request for such an explanation must be made as soon as the candidate has been notified of the grade.

Appeals against a grade, written exam

The student may appeal directly (without asking for an explanation first). The deadline for doing so is three weeks after the results were announced. If the student has asked for an explanation, the appeals deadline is three weeks after the explanation was given.

In any new evaluation, the examiners shall not be informed of the original grade, the examiner's explanation for this or the student's justification for the appeal. At least two examiners are to take part in any new evaluation (appeal evaluation), at least one of whom must be an external examiner.

You must expect it to take up to 3 months from the expiry of the appeals deadline until you are informed of the result. You will receive written information about the result of your appeal from the study administration.

If the new evaluation varies from the original evaluation by two or more grades, yet another evaluation shall take place before the final grade is determined, according to the Act relating to universities and university colleges, section 5-3 (6). This provision took effect on 1 July 2018. 

The grade you receive after a reevaluation may be higher or lower than the original grade. The new grade is final and cannot be appealed. 

Grades assigned for a practical/oral exam may not be appealed against.

The form for appealing against a grade can be found here: Appeal concerning a grade.

Complaints regarding a formal error in the exam

Formal errors are, for example, errors in tasks that are set, errors in carrying out the exam or errors in the evaluation of the exam that you believe may have affected the result.

The deadline for submitting a complaint about formal errors is three weeks after the date when you became or ought to have become aware of the factors on which the complaint is based.

The consequence of a complaint based on a formal error may be that the your answer paper is re-evaluated or that you get to take the exam again.

A complaint based on a formal error in the exam must be signed and submitted/sent to the study administration at the relevant study location. There is no form for such complaints.

The appeals committee

The appeals committe processes cases concerning plagiarism, cheating and complaints regarding a formal error in the exam.

Contact information for questions

For students at Breistein:

Profile Image
Margun Mæstad
Study advisor

For students in Kristiansand:

Profile Image
Vibecke Wales
Study advisor

For students in Oslo:

Profile Image
Birgitte Bø Vatnar
Study advisor

For students in Sandviken:

Profile Image
Caroline Sanden
Student adviser

The grading scale and assessment criteria

The grading scale and assessment criteria have been prepared by Universities Norway (UHR).

Symbol

Description

General, non-subject-specific description of the assessment criteria

A

Excellent

An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent
judgement and a very high degree of independent thinking.

B

Very good

A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a high
degree of independent thinking.

C

Good

A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of
judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas.

D

Satisfactory

A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

E

Sufficient

A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a
very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

F

Fail

A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate
demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking.

 

Qualitative description of the assessment criteria for teacher training

Symbol

Designation

Qualitative description of the assessment criteria for teacher training

A

Excellent

Has excellent knowledge and an excellent ability to make independent use of this knowledge, critically and creatively. Demonstrates an excellent overview of the topic's subject-matter and didactic content and a high level of reflection about learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop.

B

Very good

Has a very high level of knowledge and a very good ability to make independent use of this knowledge, critically and creatively. Demonstrates a very good overview of the topic's subject-matter and didactic content and a very good ability to reflect about learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop.

C

Good

Has a good level of knowledge and a good ability to make independent use of this knowledge. Demonstrates a good ability to reflect over learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop.

D

Quite good

Has limited knowledge and some ability to make independent use of this knowledge. Demonstrates some ability to reflect over learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop.

E

Sufficient

Meets the minimum knowledge requirements, but uses this knowledge in a less independent manner. A low level of reflection about learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop.

F

Failed

Insufficient knowledge about the learning goals, the distinctive nature of the profession and the role of the teacher with regard to how children and young people learn and develop. Demonstrates little insight into the coherence of the subject matter and little or no ability to use his/her knowledge in an independent manner.

 

Pass/fail

Pass

Has within all the five areas of expertise (subject-matter, didactic, social, professional ethics, change and development) demonstrated a level of knowledge/skill that meets that which is required for practising as a teacher.

Fail

Has a level of knowledge/skill in at least one of the five areas of expertise (subject-matter, didactic, social, professional ethics, change and development) that lies below that which is required for practising as a teacher.