CHIEF EXECUTIVE
PROFESSOR SIR STEVE SMITH AcSS
Northcote House
The Queen’s Drive
Exeter
UK EX4 4QJ
Telephone+44 (0)1392 263000
Fax+44 (0)1392 263008
Web
SS/RB
12 July 2012
Dear Andrew
Professor Jones: External Examiner’s Report 2011-2012
College of Humanities: Drama
Drama single Honours
Good Practice:
I would praise again the use of oral presentations throughout many of the modules in Drama. Its introduction into the major final year critical writing module Theatre Praxis has been a particular success. I would suggest the rolling out of the use of abstracts in modules involving practice, where the brief given is open. The abstract helps the student[s] define their objectives in relation to the module's aims and allows the assessor better to judge the practice in the light of the brief. If abstracts were submitted electronically, it would also provide an assessment point to be generated where assessors' feedback could be formally and uniformally captured.
Recommendations:
Essential: Areas of concern which, in your opinion, place academic quality and/or standards at risk and require an immediate response from the Associate Dean for Education.
DRA2061: both external examiners agreed that the essay assignments on this module should be lowered by 5%, as we felt results were out of line with other modules. I repeat my advice that the assessment for this module be looked at again, especially in the light of my comments above concerning the appropriateness of the essay as an assessment mode for all modules.
The External also raises the following issue:
Last session I raised a concern over the classification system. I raise it again for two reasons. Firstly a comparison I noted from the Drama results between two students: both had 3 modules at 1st and five at 2.1; one was awarded a first, the other a 2.1, although the first had a lower overall average. Looking at individual assessment, the first had three at 2.2, ten at 2.1 and eight at 1st; whereas the second had none at 2.2, 13 at 2.1 and nine at 1st. Presumably since the majority of one's 1sts were in Part Two, this accounts for their award. However, I do think the second student has a case with a higher average and a more consistent performance over both years; and your procedures should allow for such cases to be presented to the School-level board. The second reason was that several external examiners from other disciplines raised this very issue at the School board, suggesting that there is a more widely held concern that there may be an overly rigid application of a mathematical calculation, which in a very few cases does not adequately reflect a student's achievement in the light of their own cohort. So, I would suggest again that the School look at its policy and procedures.
Advisable: Areas of concern regarding threshold standards which, while currently being met, in your opinion, could be significantly improved.
To roll out the use of abstracts for practical assessments where the brief is more open.
Desirable: Areas where, in your opinion there is potential for enhancement.
See my comments above regarding the desirability of so many assessment points in each module. Whilst it is important that the programme retain its flexibility to teach the range of material and approaches that it does, and that modes of assessment respond flexibly to this diversity, there may be a case for more standardization of the mix and definition of assessments in order to maintain clarity and equity. Both external examiners were unsure as to the pedagogic purpose of the continuous-assessment mode; and thought that in most cases what it was assessing could be more usefully captured by the portfolio exercise. We also felt that that exercise ought not to be another kind of essay, but something different in kind focused on process.
The External provides more detail on this elsewhere in the report:
Having focused last session on Part Two work and this session on Part One work, I would ask the Department to look again at the number of assessments in each module: in some instances, are there too many? Over the programme as a whole, students do plenty of scholarly critical writing, all to an appropriate and many to a very high standard: is it therefore necessary for them to do this kind of writing in almost every option? Furthermore, there is potential for confusion between continuous assessment and the use of the portfolio as assessment modes. Both external examiners felt that what continuous assessment is currently assessing could be more appropriately included in redesigned portfolio assignments. Continuous assessment as currently conducted could be scaled right back, if not stopped completely.
The procedures contained in the TQA Manual look to a response normally within eight weeks after appropriate internal discussion within the College including an opportunity for input from the staff meeting and the College’s Education Strategy Group. However, as the External Examiner has raised an Essential recommendation, an immediate response is required to the specific issues raised in this section.
Please note that the University’s statement of procedures also requires that the College’s next annual main meeting of the Boards of Examiners for the programmes in question, at which an External Examiner is present, should include early in its agenda a copy of the External Examiner’s report and of the College’s response.
Yours sincerely
Professor Sir Steve Smith
Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive
ccJo Hatt