1

External Examiner Induction

• Beatrice Ollerenshaw• Karen Hadley• Jessica Greenlees

2

External Examiner Induction

• About the University• Roles and Responsibilities• Reporting• Academic Regulations• Collaborative Provision

3

About the University

“one of a new generation of great civic universities – innovative, accessible, inspirational and outward looking; with international reach and remarkable local impact.”

19,905 students enrolled.

71%

7%

23%

Fee Status - On Campus Only

Home students

EU students

International students

8

85%

15%

Mode of Attendance

Full TimePart Time

9

University Academic Strategy

• Enhancing the Student Experience • Focus on Student • Strategic aims that characterise

the student journey• Quality Management – assurance

& enhancement• Enhancement themes

10

Roles & Responsibilities

• Confirmation of standards by:– Scrutinising proposed assessments– Sampling completed work

• Ensuring fairness, compliance with University regulations

• Advising on proposed changes• Liaison with other examiners• Comparing with benchmark statements

and Framework for Higher Education Qualifications

• QAA Code of Practice for External Examiners

• National Credit Framework

11

Moderation

• 10% across all mark boundaries• Similar sample sent to externals

for moderation• Minimum

–Projects, dissertations usually double marked

12

Adjustments to marks

• For whole cohort only• May move boundaries at

programme board• Advise prior to board as

moderation• Board is responsible for actual

marks

13

Viva Voce

• Sampling• Assist board eg illness• Resolve differences

Assessment Criteria

• The university has a set of Generic Assessment Criteria

• If not applicable, Subject Specific Assessment Criteria can be approved at university level

14

Extenuating Circumstances

• Extension of 72 hours can be authorised by module leader

• Student’s responsibility to present with appropriate evidence

• Must be submitted before board• Extenuating Circumstances panel used • Generally deferred attempt given• Fit-to-Sit

15

Academic Integrity and Academic Misconduct

• Covers– Plagiarism– Collusion– Submitting others work– Cheating

• Raising Awareness• Penalties• Turnitin

16

Anonymous Marking

• Implemented for all examinations only

• Checking procedure in place• Check tied to moderation

17

Programme Documentation

• Module Guides• Programme Handbooks• adapted for off-campus provision

18

19

Assessment Boards

• Module Boards consider pass/fail• Programme Boards determine

progression and award• May be combined

–generally are for Masters– Increasingly combined at

Undergraduate level

20

Module Progression

• Pass/fail/refer/defer decisions• Marking in % • Referred in elements

– other marks stand, refer capped at 40%

• Full second attempt allowed with attendance– module mark capped at 40%

• Compensation within modules provided pass at 40% achieved overall (NB programme specific regulations may apply)

21

Programme Progression

• Undergraduate Degrees – Only 20 failed credits may be trailed

into Stage 2, Stage 3• Cannot proceed to Stage 3 unless

all Stage 1 requirements are met• Asked to leave if performance is

‘unsatisfactory’

22

Programme Progression

• Compensation at programme level for UG of one module (20 credits) per Stage by right; up to further 20 credits at discretion of Board, provided that:– 45% average in other modules– All assessment submitted for the

module• No compensation at Masters

The awards process

• Marks for the best 100 credits obtained at Stage 2 are averaged (weighted by module size – e.g. 20 credits get twice the weight of 10), and the same is done for the best 100 credits obtained at Stage 3.

• These are combined so that the Stage 3 average carries more weight than the Stage 2 average (it counts four times more: 80% of the classification; Stage 2 is 20%). This final figure determines the degree classification.

23

Stage 2 best 100 credits

ModuleDEG205 is taken out of the calculation.

Cumulative credits

DEG203(20 credits)

DEG202(20 credits)

DEG206(20 credits)

DEG204(20 credits)

DEG201(20 credits)

DEG205(20 credits)

68% 65% 63% 59% 52% 48%

20 credits 40 credits 60 credits 80 credits 100 credits

NOT USED

24

Stage 3 best 100 credits

ModuleDEG303 is taken out of the calculation.

Cumulative credits

DEG302(20 credits)

DEG305(20 credits)

DEG309(10 credits)

DEG301(10 credits)

DEG304(40 credits)

DEG303(20 credits)

65% 63% 63% 63% 54% 51%

20 credits

40 credits

50 credits

60 credits

100 credits

NOT USED

25

A worked example

Working out the Stage 2 credit-weighted average (20x68)+(20x65)+(20x63)+(20x59)+(20x52) = 61406140/100 = 61.4 credit-weighted Stage average

Working out the Stage 3 credit-weighted average (20x65)+(20x63)+(10x63)+(10x63)+(40x54) = 59805980/100 = 59.8 credit-weighted Stage average

Weighting the Stages61.4 x 20% = 12.28 59.8 x 80% = 47.84

Adding the Stages to give the final result12.28 + 47.84 = 60.12% = 2:1

26

Notes on the process

• Pass/fail modules are excluded from the calculation

• Modules which span the 100 credit boundary – the eligible credits are used

• 2% borderline for exercise of discretion

27

28

Foundation Degrees with Commendation

• At least 65% in each module contributing to the top 100 stage 2 credits

29

Masters with Distinction and Merit

• Distinction - 60 credits at >70%• Merit – 60 credits at > 60%• Programme Board specifies which

modules• Normally project/dissertation• May be programme specific

regulations

30

Reporting

• Standards, level of challenge• Free text under headings• Good practice and areas for enhancement• Specific information on delivery at each

collaborative partner as appropriate• Within six weeks of final board• To Chair of Academic Board via Academic

Services• Directly to VC if seriously concerned• Boards MUST respond formally to External

Examiner• Annual Overview Reports

31

Collaborative Provision

• Partners in the region, UK and overseas• Different models of collaboration - pre/post partner review terminology• Academic quality and standards the same as

or equivalent to on-campus• Student experience the same as or equivalent

to on-campus

32

Collaborative Provision cont’d

Monitored by link person– centre leader role

• for international, private UK and FECs outside the region

• usually one per partner per faculty• main communication pathway between partner

and faculty• at least 2 visits/year

– faculty partnership leader role• for all FECs in the region• has oversight of faculty provision at the partner• works with faculty programme leaders who visit

and communicate regularly with the partner

Collaborative Provision cont’d

Also monitored through

• annual monitoring – by the partner by subject area/programme– by the centre leader / faculty partnership

leader– which feed into the main programme annual

review.

33

34

Collaborative Provision cont’d

An External Examiner• is associated with a programme / module of study• covers all cohorts from both on and off-campus*• will sample assessment from all cohorts on and off-

campus• could be involved with assessment boards that cover on

and off-campus• will cover all sites where this programme is delivered in

his/her report making specific reference to good practice or issues at a particular partner. A separate sheet within the report must be completed for each partner delivering the programme / module.

• *FBL arrangements are different• Dual awards

Note: EEs are not required to visit partners unless there is a need to moderate work, assess practical sessions, performances, exhibitions, etc or hold vivas.