ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY

Guidance on Workloads for Tier 1 External Examiners

[APPROVED BY THE ACADEMIC STANDARDS, QUALITY & REGULATIONS COMMITTEE – 11th MARCH 2008 AND FEES REVISED FOR 2010/11]

1.  Introduction

1.1  In addition to the submission of an annual written report, the main work of a tier 1 - Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) - external examiner is the moderation of assessed student work. In order to determine an external examiner’s workload, it is necessary to calculate the amount of moderation that is required to be undertaken by an external examiner.

1.2  The following factors influence the amount of moderation required:

·  Credit rating of the module

·  The typical number of students enrolled for a module in any one cohort

·  The number of times (occurrences) per academic year in which a module is delivered

2.  Module Moderation Equivalences

The easiest way to express the workload of the tier 1 external examiner is by the use of module moderation equivalences where the above factors are used to reach a number for each module which is based on the lowest common denominator at Anglia Ruskin; a 15 credit module, delivered once a year to 80 students or fewer (80 is selected because this is the point at which a higher number of students results in an increase in the size of the sample of assessed work that requires external moderation, in accordance with the Senate Codes of Practice on the Assessment of Students and External Examiners for Taught Pathways).

To this end a module moderation equivalence calculator has been developed to determine the moderation equivalence for every module and is attached to this paper.

The Head of Department is responsible for determining his/her Department’s module moderation equivalence. Once this has been calculated for all its modules (a separate number for each individual module), the sum for all modules expresses the total amount of assessed student work that needs to be moderated as an equivalent of 15 credit modules, delivered once a year to 80 students or fewer.

Consultation with other higher education institutions which operate a similar modular scheme to the University’s, suggests that an Anglia Ruskin module moderation equivalence of 20 is the norm for an external examiner’s annual workload. Consequently, in order for a Department to determine exactly how many external examiners it should appoint to its DAP, the total of module moderation equivalences is simply divided by 20.

3.  Examples

[Please refer to diagram, attached to this paper, for assistance]

A 15 credit module with an average cohort size of 60 students delivered only once in an academic year has a module moderation equivalence of 1.

Calculation: 1 x 1 (as module size is 15 credits) = 1

1 x 1 (as cohort size is less than 80) = 1

1 x 1 (as delivered only once in an academic year) = 1

A 30 credit module with an average cohort size of 30 delivered twice in an academic year has a module moderation equivalence of 4.

Calculation: 1 x 2 (as module size is 30 credits) = 2

2 x 1 (as cohort size is less than 80) = 2

2 x 2 (as delivered twice in an academic year) = 4

A 45 credit module with an average cohort size of 120 (this includes students at all locations of delivery) delivered twice in an academic year has a module moderation equivalence of 12.

Calculation: 1 x 3 (as module size is 45 credits) = 3

3 x 2 (as cohort size is between 81 and 160) = 6

6 x 2 (as delivered twice in an academic year) = 12

A 60 credit module with an average cohort size of 40 delivered once in an academic year (albeit over two semesters) has a module moderation equivalence of 4.

Calculation: 1 x 4 (as module size is 60 credits) = 4

4 x 1 (as cohort size is less than 80) = 4

4 x 1 (as delivered once in an academic year) = 4

In the above examples, these four modules have produced a module moderation equivalence of 21 (1 + 4 + 12 + 4). Using the figure of 20 as a standard annual workload for a tier 1 external examiner, detailed in paragraph 2.7 above, the above four modules would be deemed as a normal workload for one external examiner.

Therefore, it follows that a department with a module moderation equivalence of 90 would expect to appoint 5 external examiners (90 divided by 20 = 4.5) to its DAP; A department with a module moderation equivalence of 27 would expect to appoint 2 external examiners (27 divided by 20 = 1.35) to its DAP.

4.  Conclusions and Further Guidance

This system is designed to be used as guidance by faculties when appointing external examiners and determining annual external examiner workloads and is based on the minimum standard fee of £475 for a Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) duty and £400 for an Institutional Awards Board (IAB).

Faculties are permitted to propose a higher fee at the nomination stage and this may require (by agreement) such external examiners to undertake more work than the standard norm articulated in this guidance paper.

It is important to note that there may be local factors, known to an individual Head of Department (and other senior colleagues involved in curriculum management roles), which would impact on the above stated module moderation equivalences and, therefore, such factors need to be taken into account by the Head of Department.

For further guidance, please contact Olivia Sjollema, Institutional Quality Assurance Officer () or Caroline Watts, Head of the Quality Assurance Unit ().

June 2011 Academic Office 1 External Examiners’ Workloads

Calculating a Module’s Moderation Equivalence