REGULATION FOR NON-EXAMINING CHAIRPERSONS OFMAGISTEREXAMINATION PANELS
1Appointment of a non-examining chairperson
1.1A departmentalchairpersonacts as anon-examiningchairpersonof a particularexamination panel.
1.2If a departmentalchairpersonis not available to act as anon-examiningchairpersonor if he/she has any direct interest in the outcome of the thesis, a senior staff member of thedepartment, who already has a PhD, will act as chairperson.
2Arrangements between thenon-examiningchairpersonand other interested parties before the oral examination (100% thesis option)
2.1Theoffice of the Vice-Dean: Research providesthe departmental chairperson with the complete set of examiners’ reports well in time before the oral examination is to take place.
2.2Thedepartmentalchairpersonmakes sure ofthecontents of the reports as well as of the recommendations of the various examiners.
2.3After receipt of all the examiners’ reports and in consultation with the examination panel and the supervisor, thedepartmentalchairpersondetermines a suitable date, time and venue for the oralexamination (this could imply a telephone conference or presence)andappoints anon-examiningchairperson if necessary.
2.4Thenon-examiningchairpersoninforms theexamination committee, supervisorand studentof the arrangements fortheexamination.
2.5Thenon-examiningchairpersonensures that the minimum requirements for conducting a valid oral examination, as set by the Faculty of Education, are met.
2.6The examiners’ reports are made available to the supervisor(s), theexaminersandthestudent(via the supervisor) in view of preparing for the oralexamination. Only the narrative part ofexaminers’ reportsis made available to the student.
2.7The relevant department is responsible for all physical arrangements for the oralexamination (e.g. travel, accommodation, venue, projection facilities and submission of remuneration claims).
3Duties and powers ofthenon-examiningchairpersonduring the oral examination session (100% thesisoption)
3.1Thenon-examiningchairpersonmakes arrangements for theexamination panel to meet, without the magister candidate, before the appointed examination time.
3.2On this occasion thenon-examiningchairpersonconstitutes theexamination panel.
3.3Thenon-examiningchairpersonmakes the necessary organisational arrangements forthe sessionwith the members oftheexamination panel, for example, theorder and length of time in whichtheexaminersget the opportunity to question the candidate.Thesupervisorandco-supervisordo not take part in thediscussion or questioning.
3.4Thenon-examiningchairpersonrequests thecandidateandsupervisorto come in andinformsthecandidateaboutthe status oftheexaminationandtheorganisationalarrangements forthe session.
3.5Thenon-examiningchairpersonguides the examination session without participating in the discussion.
3.6If a member oftheexamination panelis absent, thenon-examiningchairpersonensures that questions and comments contained in this examiner’s report are presented to the candidate by another member of the examination panel.
3.7After alltheexaminershave had an opportunity to question thecandidate,thenon-examiningchairpersongivesthecandidatean opportunity for possible questions or comments to the members of theexamination panel.
3.8Thenon-examiningchairpersonrequeststhecandidateandsupervisor(s) to leave the room so thattheexamination panelcan deliberate about a final mark forthethesis.
3.9Thenon-examiningchairpersonsummons the candidateandthe supervisorandinforms them about the findings ofthecommitteeandthat the recommendations are subject to the approval of the Faculty Board.
4Duties of the non-examiningchairpersonon conclusion of theexamination session (100% thesis option)
4.1Thenon-examiningchairpersondraws up a covering letter (see example, Appendix A) in whichthecandidate’s final performance mark is indicated, and deliversit to the Dean and the Faculty Secretary.At the same time, therelevant department captures the mark on the university systems.
4.2In thecase of serious disagreement between the examiners that makes it impossible for the examination panelto reach consensus regarding a certain point, the non-examiningchairpersonis required to provide the faculty’s Examination Committee with a report containing the examiners’ different points of view and their complete reports. The matter will be further handled by the Examination Committee.
5Duties ofthenon-examiningchairperson in thecase of Master’s courseworkwhere the thesismakes up 50% or more of the final performance mark
5.1Thenon-examiningchairpersondraws up a covering letter (see example, Appendix B) in which thecandidate’s final performance mark (consisting of a mark for coursework andthethesis) is indicated and delivers it to the Dean andtheFaculty Secretary.At the same time, the relevant department captures the mark on the university systems.
5.2In cases where the difference between the mark allocation of examiners of the thesis create a “borderline case” situation (e.g. where pass/fail or distinction/non-distinction is at stake) or where thevarious examiners’ assessments differby more than 15%, theexaminers’ reports must be referred to the faculty’s Examination Committeefor arbitration.
5.3In all cases students may have access tothenarrative comments in the examiners’ reports.
Fifth version, 4 July 2009
Approved by M&D Programme Committee
Appendix A
Departmentof Curriculum Studies, Private Bag X17602 Stellenbosch / Tel 808 2300/2297
Fax: 808 2295
E-mail:
Date
The Dean
Faculty of Education
StellenboschUniversity
Dear Prof. Waghid
ORALEXAMINATION: MEd (full thesis) CANDIDATE J Jarvis (15006379)
As non-examiningchairpersonof theexamination committeefor the above-mentionedcandidateI report the following:
Theoralexaminationwas conducted on 21 January 2008.
Theexamination panelcomprised the following persons:
Prof H C Steyn (External: UNISA)
Prof AE Carl(Internal)
Both the former examiner and thecandidate were telephonically involved in theoral examining.
Theoralexaminationwas conducted to the satisfaction of the members of theexamination committee, thesupervisorandthecandidate. On conclusion of the examination, theexaminersunanimously recommended a distinction mark of 75%, taking into considerationminor textual and technical corrections to be made to the satisfaction of both the examiners and the supervisors.
I therefore declare herewith that therequirementsas determined bytheoralexamining process were properly complied with andI recommend to the Faculty Board that the degree be conferred on the candidate.
Yours sincerely
______
Prof ………………….
Non-examiningChairperson
Appendix B
Department of Curriculum Studies, Private Bag X17602 Stellenbosch / Tel 808 2300/2297
Fax: 808 2295
E-mail:
Datum
The Dean
Faculty of Education
StellenboschUniversity
Dear Prof. Waghid
EXAMINATION: MEd (Mini-thesis) CANDIDATE XXXXXXX (Student number)
As non-examiningchairpersonoftheexamination committeefor the above-mentionedcandidateI report the following:
Theexamination panelcomprised the following persons:
Prof. L van Rooyen (External: UNISA)
Prof. AE Carl(Internal).
Theexamination procedure was followed to the satisfaction of the members of theexamination committee, thesupervisorandthecandidate. Theexaminersrecommended the following marks for the mini-thesis: Prof. L van Rooyen: 75%and Prof. AE Carl: 60%, both taking into consideration minor textual and technical corrections that need to be made to the satisfaction of thesupervisor. Theaverage mark for the mini-thesis is therefore68%. Themark for coursework was 60%andthe final pass mark ofthecandidate is therefore64% (based on a 50:50 division of weight between coursework andthe mini-thesis).
I therefore declare herewith that the requirements as determined by the oral examining process were properly complied with and I recommend to the Faculty Board that the degree be conferred on the candidate.
Yours sincerely
______
Prof. ………………….
DepartmentalChairperson