External Examiner Seminar 24 January 2011

1. External Examiner Seminar24 January 2011 Summary of 2009/10 External Examiner Reports Ian Shell, Sally Iles, Liz Morrow Quality Support

2. Outline • action after last year’s seminar • 2009/10 reports: • summary report on standards • issues from 2009/10 reports • questions/discussion

3. Action from last year

4. 2009/10 reports • 280 reports considered • document mature, reflective & constructively critical process to safeguard academic standards • QA procedures generally reported to be improving, transparent, meticulous, sometimes exemplary • overview report (including feedback from this session) will go to University Learning & Teaching Committee and Academic Board • then published on external examiners' webpage

5. Summary report on standards • part A of report template asks for confirmation that standards are being maintained • any ‘no’ here will be followed up at University Learning & Teaching Committee • one ‘no’ on student performance • qualified ‘no’ on process as anonymous marking not in place • reservation on student performance/process in relation to practical examination at a partner institution

6. Part A questions

7. Issues from 2009/10 reports • external examiner arrangements • assessment and marking • student performance • exam boards and regulations

8. External examiner arrangements 1 • reports reflect rigorous & reflective dialogue between EEs and programme teams • wealth of detailed subject-specific feedback on assessment process • widespread acknowledgment of dedication & commitment of programme teams • some requests for more contextual information, eg module/programme review information; one EE asks that reporting template includes a question on the student experience views

9. External examiner arrangements 2 • appreciation of briefing information, external examiner seminar, web-page • overall improvement reported in programme/module information provided to external examiners • internal moderation generally more clearly conveyed - good practice is cited and ‘raises the bar’ • improvement evident where EE workloads previously reported to be high • still examples of unrealistic timescales, and exam board dates advised too late

10. Assessment and marking 1 • assessment practice generally reported to be rigorous and fair • extensive reference to creative and innovative assessment strategies • significant improvement in quality of assessment feedback • writing comments directly on scripts viewed positively • others critical of hand-written feedback • clustering of PG marks in narrow band (50-70) remains an issue

11. Assessment and marking 2 • need for anonymous marking in coursework raised by some (piloted 2010/11 for implementation 2011/12) • some suggest extended use of ‘turnitin’ in summative assessment • some EEs feel compromised by early release of un-moderated marks • prompt feedback vs rigorous QA views

12. Student performance • widespread reporting of rigour in maintenance of standards • improved international student performance (linked to better intake) • extensive corroboration of consistent approach to collaborative provision • new requirement to complete all components of assessment welcomed by some • several requests for student performance data across modules

13. Exam boards/regulations • exam boards well organised, staff well briefed and familiar with regulations • discretion exercised fairly • PEC/TEC procedure well established • paperless boards more widespread, welcomed • revised clause in Examiners’ Handbook (on EE confidentiality) remains an issue for EEs appointed by BSB/SRA • graphical display of module results ‘misleading’

14. Questions/discussion • less issues raised in reports this year, but your views on what we should follow up are welcome