Summary of Issues from 2008 External Examiner Reports

							Academic Registry




     Summary of Issues from 2008
     External Examiner Reports

        External Examiners’ Seminar 2009
       Alan Dordoy, Liz Morrow, LT Support
                  Ian Shell NBS
Academic Registry



       Outline
      Action after last year’s seminar
      2008 Reports:
          Summary Report on Standards
          Issues from 2008 reports
      Questions/Discussion
Academic Registry



       Action after last year’s seminar
Discussion Point           Follow up
Assessment workloads       Academic Calendar reform
and timing                 scheduled for 2009/10
Marks ending in 9 and      •Revised ‘9’s guidelines issued;
use of marking scales in   still some confusion (see below)
place of percentages       •No action on scales at present

Improving feedback to      •Exam scripts to be returned
students                   •Student guides to using feedback
                           issued and feedback campaign
Academic Registry



       2008 Reports
   Reports mostly very positive, increasingly so.
    Many comments on good processes, committed
    staff, improving resources
   Schools should have fed back to you with action
    being taken in response to your reports; 2008
    reports say this happens and we are improving –
    but a few feel previous recommendations have not
    been acted on. Can all be?
   Overview report will go to DVC, University LT
    Committee, Academic Board – and to yourselves
Academic Registry



       Summary Report on Standards
    Part A of the report template asks for confirmation
     that standards are being maintained. Any ‘no’ here
     must be reported to University LT Committee
    Four ‘no’ responses this year on the comparability of
     performance question – mainly in relation to
     international student achievement (see below). One
     ‘no’ on processes.
    Are Part A questions worded clearly enough? (they
     came from HEFCE/TQI; we can change them now)
Academic Registry



       Part A Questions
Academic Registry



        Issues from 2008 Reports
       External Examiner arrangements
       Assessment and marking
       Student performance
       Exam Boards and Regulations
       Confidentiality issues
Academic Registry



       Ext Examiner Arrangements
     Central information – external examiner
      seminar and web page are useful
     School/programme/module information
      supplied to externals – clear improvements
      over 2007 but still some gaps
     External examiner workloads considered
      too high in some cases. How can we
      resolve this?
Academic Registry



       Assessment and Marking
    Assessment practices generally reported as sound and
     fair; good information provided to students on tasks
     and criteria, good and innovative range of assessment
     types used, good use of Blackboard etc
    More quality control of project topics wanted in some
     areas – sign-off of proposal/outline etc to avoid
     ‘misconceived’ dissertations
    Quality of feedback to students reported to have
     improved – writing of comments directly on scripts
     welcomed (except for legibility!)
Academic Registry



       Assessment and Marking
     Confusion over rounding of ‘9’s remains in some
      areas – note that the guidelines specify this happens
      only for the module, not by component. The aim is
      to get academic judgement on the module class
      before the exam board
     Change of postgraduate pass mark from 40 to 50
      welcomed in some areas as removing confusion.
      However, has caused confusion elsewhere and may
      have led to clustering of PG marks in a narrow band
      (50-70). Views?
Academic Registry



       Student Performance
     Rigor in maintaining a consistent standard
      across collaborative programmes noted,
      despite some variability between partner
      organisations
     Some expressed concern at poorer
      performance of some international
      students. Increased monitoring of
      admissions? Attendance monitoring?
      Views?
Academic Registry



       Exam Boards/Regulations
      Boards well organised – documentation much
       improved this year – very few SITS issues raised
      A few attended pilots of paperless boards with
       digital presentation of marks. Noted that this
       made it difficult to track progression or to
       consider complex cases
      Increased numbers of technical extenuating
       circumstances affecting exams this year (due to
       large amount of building work?)
Academic Registry



        Exam Boards/Regulations
       Mixed views remain on non-discretionary
        compensation at final level; some see this as fair,
        others as meaning students have not met all final
        level outcomes (NB this was raised last year in
        relation to what is recorded on student transcripts –
        requires further discussion). Views?
       Some concern over classification rules – inflexibility
        of ‘majority of credit’ rule for borderline cases,
        especially where programme structures use large
        (eg 60 credit) modules
Academic Registry



       Exam Boards/Regulations
      Academic misconduct – conflicting views
       on whether current rules tough enough,
       also whether Schools are evolving diverse
       strategies (NB we are now collecting a
       consistent data set and monitoring
       numbers of cases and outcomes across
       the university)
Academic Registry



       Confidentiality
      Note that exam board confidentiality is now
       written into the Examiners’ Handbook (issue had
       arisen in relation to PSRB obligations)
      Concerns remain over rules on students
       maintaining placement/professional
       confidentiality in assessments
      Some examiners still including student names in
       their reports (which must, under HEFCE TQI
       requirements, be shared with student reps)
Academic Registry



         Questions/Discussion
        Less issues thrown up in the reports this
         year, but your views on what we should
         follow up are welcome