Name of Faculty:
Academic Yearto which report relates:
Programme(s)[1] to which report relates:
Is the programme delivered under collaborative arrangements? If so, please state the name(s) of the partner(s) and the location(s) of delivery:
External Examiner Name:
Home Institutionof External Examiner:
Year of Tenure:
Date:
External Examiners' reports cannot be considered confidential. The University is committed to making External Examiners’ reports publicly available, and your report will be available to all students.Your report therefore must not name, or otherwise identify any student or staff member on the programme(s) or module(s) that you are reporting on.
Your report should be submitted electronically to the Vice President (Education), via within four weeks of the final Board of Examiners meeting for the academic year of the report. Your report will be acknowledged by a member of the Quality, Standards and Accreditation Team.
If you experience any difficulties completing this form please contact .
Examiners are reminded that they may make a separate confidential report directly to the President and Vice-Chancellor () on any matter of serious concern, and/or ask that the report below be considered by the President and Vice-Chancellor directly.
External Examiners are asked to write one report for the cluster of programmes at the same level for which they examine; separate reports for undergraduate and postgraduate level programmes are required.
External examiners are asked, as well as answering the specific yes/no questions, to provide qualitative comment where possible, to assist the University and the Programme Team in managing standards and quality effectively. Please also ensure that recommendations are listed in section 8 of this template.
1.Threshold standards of awards
Are the threshold academic standards[2]1 for the awards (or award elements) in alignment with the standards set by national subject benchmarks, the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ), any relevant Professional Statutory Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements and the relevant University programme specifications?Please delete as applicable / Yes/No
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
2.Academic standards of student achievement
Are the academic standards and the standards of student achievement in the programme examined comparable with the standards of similar programmes, or parts of programmes, in other UK higher education institutions with which you are familiar? Where programmes are delivered under different collaborative arrangements please indicate the extent to which standards and achievement are consistent across these programmes.Please delete as applicable / Yes/No
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
3.Assessment methods and the appropriateness of these to intended learning outcomes
Did the assessment methods measure student achievement rigorously and fairly against the intended outcomes of the programme(s) and modules? Please comment on the range and appropriateness of assessment methods, whether assessment criteria, marking schemes and arrangements for classification are set at the appropriate level and whether the assessment criteria are applied appropriately and communicated effectively to students.Please delete as applicable: / Yes/No
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
4.Assessment process
Was the process for assessment, examination and the determination of awards conducted soundly, equitably and fairly in line with the relevant University policies and regulations?Please delete as applicable: / Yes/No
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
5.Application of procedures relating to special considerationsand academic integrity.
Were regulations governing Special Consideration Boards and Academic Integrity cases applied fairly and consistently? If you were not involved in these procedures please selected Not Applicable.Please delete as applicable: / Yes/No/Not Applicable
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
6.Curriculum, learning and teaching methods and resources
Please comment below on whether the curriculum remains current and whether the quality and range of learning and teaching methods and resources available to students are appropriate. Where programmes are delivered by different collaborative partners please indicate if there are specific concerns that you would like to raise.Comment: / Programme Team Response:
7.Professional body requirements
Please indicate below if there are any specific commentsarising in the programme which relate to the requirements of a professional, statutory or regulatory bodyComment: / Programme Team Response:
8.Key recommendations and good practice
Please indicate anyKey recommendations to the Programme Team, the Faculty or the University. (This should also include any recommendations for action to enhance the quality of learning opportunities provided to students) .Recommendations: / Programme Team Response:
Please state below whether commentsmade in your previous report(s) have been, or are being,addressed to your satisfaction.
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
On the basis of your involvement in the programme please identify below anything you consider innovative or particularly good practice
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
9.Checklist
Pleasedelete as applicable for each statement below to confirm whether you have received sufficient information to enable you to undertake your role effectively.If your response to any of the questions is ‘No’ please amplify in the box provided at the end of this section.
Programme Materials
Did you receive or otherwise have appropriate access to
/ Programme handbook(s)? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Programme regulations (these may be in the programme handbook)? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Module descriptions (these may be in the programme handbook)? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Assessment briefs/marking criteria? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ QAA subject benchmarks (where relevant) / Yes/No/Not Applicable
Draft Examination Papers
- .
(ii) If not, was this by arrangement with you? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
- .
- .
Reviewing Examination Scripts
- a
(ii) Were you satisfied with the method of selecting the scripts for review? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Was the general standard and consistency of marking appropriate? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
- .
Dissertation/Project Reports
/ Was the choice of subjects for dissertations appropriate? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Were the methods and standard of assessment appropriate? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
Coursework/continuously assessed work
/ Was sufficient coursework made available to you for review? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Was the method and general standard of marking and consistency satisfactory? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
Orals/performance/recitals/appropriate professional placements
/ Were suitable arrangements made for you to conduct orals and/or moderate performances/recitals/presentations/appropriate professional placements? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
Board of Examiners
/ Were you able to attend the meeting? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Was the meeting conducted to your satisfaction? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
/ Were you satisfied with the recommendations of the Board of Examiners? / Yes/No/Not Applicable
If your response to any of the above questions is ‘No’ please amplify below, or cross-refer to the relevant section in your report.
Comment: / Programme Team Response:
10.For Examiners completing their first or final year in office only
For external examiners in their first year of office
Please comment on the effectiveness of the arrangements for your induction as an external examiner.For external examiners in their final year of office
Please comment below on any significant changes in standards over your term of office and/or any other areas that you feel appropriate in the summation of your responsibilities.Please comment below on whether any concernsyou have raised in your reports during your term of office have been addressed to your satisfaction.
For Use when completing response to External Examiner (insert electronic signature, if available)
Signed:Position: / e.g. Programme Lead/Coordinator/Convener
Date:
Signed:
Position: / Director of Programmes
Date:
Page 1 of 2External Examiner Report Form –December 2017
1 The Quality Assurance Agency defines threshold academic standards as follows ‘Threshold academic standards are the minimum acceptable level of achievement that a student has to demonstrate to be eligible for an academic award. For equivalent qualifications, the threshold level of achievement is agreed across the UK and is described by the qualifications descriptors set out in the national frameworks for higher education qualifications’. (UK Quality Code for Higher Education Part A: Setting and maintaining academic standards ( page 5); see also Expectation A1