1. 1 External Examiner Induction Beatrice Ollerenshaw Karen Hadley Jessica Greenlees

2. 2 External Examiner Induction About the University Roles and Responsibilities Reporting Academic Regulations Collaborative Provision

3. 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.

8. 8

9. 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. 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 UK Quality Code – Chapter B7 External Examining National Credit Framework

11. 11 Moderation 10% across all mark boundaries Similar sample sent to externals for moderation Minimum –Projects, dissertations usually double marked

12. 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. 13 Viva Voce Sampling Assist board eg illness Resolve differences

14. 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

15. 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

16. Academic Integrity and Academic Misconduct Covers –Plagiarism –Collusion –Submitting others work –Cheating Raising Awareness Penalties Turnitin 16

17. Anonymous Marking Implemented for all examinations only Checking procedure in place Check tied to moderation 17

18. Programme Documentation Module Guides Programme Handbooks adapted for off-campus provision 18

19. 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. 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. 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 Boards can withdraw students due to failure to engage. Some decisions which would allow students to progress are by discretion only.

22. 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

23. 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

24. Stage 2 best 100 credits Module DEG205 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 credits40 credits60 credits80 credits100 credits NOT USED 24

25. Stage 3 best 100 credits Module DEG303 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% 54%51% 20 credits 40 credits 50 credits 60 credits 100 credits NOT USED 25

26. A worked example Working out the Stage 2 credit-weighted average (20x68)+(20x65)+(20x63)+(20x59)+(20x52) = 6140 6140/100 = 61.4 credit-weighted Stage average Working out the Stage 3 credit-weighted average (20x65)+(20x63)+(10x63)+(10x63)+(40x54) = 5980 5980/100 = 59.8 credit-weighted Stage average Weighting the Stages 61.4 x 20% = 12.28 59.8 x 80% = 47.84 Adding the Stages to give the final result 12.28 + 47.84 = 60.12% = 2:1 26

27. 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. 28 Foundation Degrees with Commendation At least 65% in each module contributing to the top 100 stage 2 credits

29. 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. 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. 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. 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

33. 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. 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.