VIEWS: 11 PAGES: 4 POSTED ON: 1/31/2010
ROYAL HOLLOWAY University of London VISITING EXAMINER’S REPORT Please read the attached guidelines before writing your report Examiner’s Full Name: Home institution or other affiliation: Academic session to which the report applies: Sub-board to which the report applies: Undergraduate [ ] Date on which the report was completed: Postgraduate [ ] Please use the Yes/No boxes to give your conclusions on each statement. Please expand upon or qualify your response in the space marked ‘Optional comment’, especially if you have answered ‘No’, and to highlight any examples of good practice or areas for improvement. Additional pages may be used, if needed. 1. Were the standards set for the awards appropriate for qualifications at this level in this subject? Yes Optional comment: 2. Were the standards of student performance comparable with similar programmes or subjects in other UK institutions with which you are familiar? Yes Optional comment: 3. Were the processes for assessment, examination and the determination of awards sound and fairly conducted? Yes Optional comment: Organisational arrangements and documentation 4. Was the documentation on the curriculum, regulations, procedures and your role sufficient, helpful and provided in a timely way? Yes Optional comment: 5. If you are a new examiner, were you adequately briefed to conduct your role effectively? Not applicable Optional comment: 6. Were satisfactory opportunities provided for you to comment on draft examination papers or in-course assignments, marking schemes or model answers, and were your comments properly considered? Not applicable Optional comment: 7. Were you provided with a sufficient sample and range of student work to have confidence in your evaluation of standards? Yes Optional comment: [ ] No [ ] [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] 8. Were the arrangements and processes for determining awards satisfactory, including the operation of Sub-board meetings and the consideration of students with extenuating circumstances? Yes Optional comment: 9. Were you satisfied with your level of involvement in processes and meetings for determining awards? Yes Optional comment: 10. If you are a continuing examiner, are you satisfied that any substantive issues you raised last year were properly considered? Not applicable Optional comment: Assessment methods and marking 11. Was the overall volume, weighting and variety of assessments appropriate and balanced? Yes Optional comment: 12. Were assessment methods and tasks, and project/dissertation topics, appropriate to the intended learning outcomes? Yes Optional comment: 13. If you saw any feedback to students on coursework or examination performance, was it constructive and of consistent quality? Not applicable Optional comment: 14. Were marking criteria clear, appropriate and applied consistently across all assessments you sampled? Yes Optional comment: 15. Were marking methods (double or single marking, or single marking with sampling) appropriate and applied consistently? Yes Optional comment: 16. Were arrangements for the assessment of any practical elements of the programme, and viva voce examinations satisfactory? Not applicable Optional comment: Curriculum and programme overview 17. Are the aims, intended learning outcomes and content of programmes coherent, balanced and consistent with the expectations of national benchmarks? Yes Optional comment: 18. Do the content, organisation and delivery of the curriculum enable students to achieve the intended learning outcomes? Yes Optional comment: [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] [ ] No [ ] 19. If there have been any recent changes to the curriculum, have these had a positive impact on student performance? Not applicable Optional comment: 20. Please state any recommendations to the Department for enhancing the programme(s). 21. Please state any general recommendations in relation to standards or the quality of provision which require consideration at College level. 22. If relevant, please indicate whether in your view the programme meets the requirements and expectations of professional bodies (see attached guidelines). 23. If you are in your last year of office, please provide an overview which may be shared with your successor. [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] END OF REPORT GUIDELINES ON COMPLETING THE VISITING EXAMINER'S REPORT How to complete the report On each question, we are interested first of all in your overall response, and then in any additional comments you wish to make in order to expand on or qualify your response. Comments on any examples of good practice or areas for improvement are especially welcome. Feel free to make any comments you wish in the report. However, you should be aware that your report will be shown to students and that it is therefore inadvisable to identify individual students in your report. Visiting Examiners appointed to act in respect of Honours Degree programmes are asked to comment on the learning and performance of any students on Joint and Combined Honours programmes as well as those on Single Honours programmes. How to submit the report All Visiting Examiners are required to submit a complete report before payment of their fee can be released. Reports should be submitted ideally by e-mail as a Microsoft Word document to VisitingExaminers@rhul.ac.uk, or in paper to the Examinations and Research Degrees Office, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX. Electronic copies of this form and guidance are available at www.rhul.ac.uk/Registry/Examinations. You have the option of supplementing your report with a confidential annexe by writing directly to The Principal, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX. How the report will be used Your full report will be considered within the department as part of the annual review of programmes. Outcomes from this are then considered and monitored by Faculty Review Panels. Summaries of the reports from all Visiting Examiners are considered by the College Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee and Academic Board as a way of spreading good practice and agreeing action on issues which affect the institution as a whole. Your report may be shared in confidence with future Visiting Examiners, or with reviewers from the Quality Assurance Agency, or from professional or other statutory bodies. Your responses to questions 1–3 may also be shared with the University of London centrally as part of its own arrangements for assuring the quality of the University of London degree. Additional guidelines for programmes in Social Work Under GSCC guidelines, Visiting Examiners in Social Work are asked to use question 23 (or other questions, if they seem more appropriate) to comment on the following: whether delivery is consistent with what has been approved by the GSCC; whether National Occupational Standards and QAA, DoH and GSCC requirements are being met; the quality of practice learning opportunities; the acceptability of student achievement and progression profiles; the extent, strengths and weaknesses of social care service user and carer involvement; opportunities for students to learn and demonstrate inter-professional practice; opportunities for students to prepare for direct practice, and the way in which this is assessed; the implementation of systems to ensure fitness to practice; anti-discriminatory practice in the delivery of the programme; the extent of any APEL arrangements, and how these are being assessed and verified; the availability of resources, including teaching and administrative staff, practice assessors and practice learning opportunities.