ACADEMIC REGISTRY

External Examiner Sub-Committee

Handbook for External Examiners of Professional Doctorate Advanced Independent Work

Version 6November 2020

1

Contents Page

Contents1. Introduction........................................................................................................42. Professional Doctorate Awards and the Credit Accumulation & Modular Scheme......................................................................................................................63. Framework for Assessment, Award and Progression....................................94. External Examining Process and Procedures.................................................95. Assessment of the Advanced Independent Work [AIW]..............................136. Research Ethics...............................................................................................147. Other Relevant Academic Regulations..........................................................14

7.1 Extenuating Circumstances.........................................................................147.2 Academic Appeal.........................................................................................147.3 Academic Misconduct..................................................................................15

Annex A: General Information, Forms and Guidance for all AIW External Examiners................................................................................................................16Appendix A1 Guidance Note and Annual Reports for all AIW External Examiners................................................................................................................17Appendix A2 External Examiner Expense Form..................................................23Appendix A3 External Examiner Annual Fees......................................................24Appendix A4 Information Governance..................................................................26Appendix A5 Criteria for Appointing AIW External Examiner.............................27Annex B: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (2017/18 Regulations and onwards only)..............................................................29Appendix B1 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner for the Advanced Independent Work of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)...............................................30Appendix B2 Recommendation of the Examiners following Oral [or agreed alternative] Examination of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)...................................................................................................33Appendix B3 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidates Resubmission of AIW for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards).......................................................................................38Appendix B4 Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate’s Performance in a Repeat Oral Examination for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)..................................................................................................................41Appendix B5 Final Recommendations of Examiner(s) following Amendments to AIW for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)..........................44Annex C: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (Pre 2017/18 Regulations only)......................................................................................46

2

Appendix C1 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on the Advanced Independent Work of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)...............................................47Appendix C2 Recommendation of the Examiners following Oral Examination [Viva] of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only). .50Appendix C3 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate's Resubmission of Advanced Independent Work for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)...............................................55Appendix C4 Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate's Performance in a Repeat Oral (Viva Voce) Examination for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)....................................................................................................58Annex D: Teesside University Credit Level Descriptors.....................................62

3

1. Introduction

There are three types of examiners for Professional Doctorates Awards – Award Examiners, Module Examiners and Advanced Independent Work [AIW] External Examiners.

For all courses (Level 4 and above), the University appoints Award External Examiners. Their primary function is to oversee and verify the implementation of the University's Assessment & Progression Regulations in the progression of students through the levels of an award(s), ensuring comparability of treatment between students. The Award Examiner will not be involved in detailed consideration of students' work and does not have to be (or have been) a Module Examiner, although in many cases they will be a Module External Examiner for one area of the award(s) under consideration. An Award Examiner may also be requested to act as an AIW External Examiner.

The University also appoints subject specialists as Module External Examiners for all modules. They work closely with academic staff responsible for the development and delivery of modules within subject areas. The principal objective of the Module External Examiner is to ensure the performance of, and standards achieved by students are comparable with their peers on similar modules elsewhere in higher education. Such examiners may also be requested to act as an Advanced Independent Work [AIW] External Examiner.

For Professional Doctorate courses, the University also appoints External Examiners whose role is specifically to examine the Advanced Independent Work [AIW] (thesis) element of the Professional Doctorate award.

This Handbook has been designed specifically to support those External Examiners who are examining the AIW of Professional Doctorate Awards at Teesside University. It is designed to supplement the University External Examiner Handbook which is available on the External Examiner Website.

The appendices in this Handbook are intended to provide all the report forms to accompany the role of the AIW External Examiner (e.g., preliminary reports, reports of oral examination), annual report forms and expenses claim forms.

4

It should be noted that this document is not intended to replace or amend the Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards, a copy of which can be found on the University Website at:Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards (2017/18 onwards) Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards (pre 2017/18)

AIW External Examiners should consult Section 6 of the relevant Professional Doctorate Assessment Regulations which refer specifically to the assessment of the AIW.

Where reference is made to specific sections of the Professional Doctorate Assessment Regulations within this document, and where differences are detected between the two documents, it is the Regulations as presented on the University website that should be followed.

5

IMPORTANT NOTE:

The University moved to a set of new Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards in September 2017. All students who enrolled from September 2017/18 commenced on these regulations. Students who enrolled prior to that, who had not yet commenced on their AIW, were given the option to move over to the new regulations for the AIW.

A small number of students chose not to move to the new regulations and this was recorded on the University’s Student Record System [SITS]. The Course Leader/School Senior Administrator can advise as to whether any students you are considering should be examined under the “old” [pre 2017/18] regulations.

There are a number of differences relating to the management and regulation of the AIW (e.g. new regulations include availability of “reassessment prior to oral examination” and a requirement to have an Independent non-examining Chair [IneC] for the oral examination).

This Handbook contains the necessary forms for the assessment of all candidates, regardless of the Assessment Regulations a student will be assessed by. The information is made available as follows:

Annex A: General Information, Forms and Guidance for all AIW External Examiners

Annex B: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (2017/18 Regulations and onwards only)

Annex C: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (Pre 2017/18 Regulations only)

All queries relating to the examination of a particular student should be referred to the Course Leader for the specific Professional Doctorate award or the Senior Administrator in the School within which the Professional Doctorate course is based.

If you have any requests or special needs regarding the examination of the AIW, the physical setting for the oral examination or travel and accommodation arrangements, please contact the Course Leader/ Senior Administrator as soon as possible.

2. Professional Doctorate Awards and the Credit Accumulation & Modular Scheme

Professional Doctorate qualifications are awarded for the creation and interpretation, construction and/or exposition of knowledge which extends the forefront of the discipline and/or professional practice, including by original research. Further information is provided within the Quality Assurance Agency Doctoral Degree Characteristics Statement .

Professional Doctorate modules are generally located at Level 8 of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ)1 but within a Professional Doctorate award, a maximum of 120 credits may be at Level 7.

Professional Doctorate awards at Teesside University operate within the University’s Credit Accumulation & Modular Scheme [CAMS] and are credit-rated and modular, with an emphasis on professionally relevant practice-orientated learning and research that together make an original contribution to knowledge. Professional Doctorate awards are equivalent in intellectual demand, academic outcomes and standard completion time to those of a traditional Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) award.

The following Professional Doctorates are currently available on the Schedule of Awards of the University:

Award PrefixMinimum

CAMS Requirements

Notes

Professional Doctorates: Doctor of

Clinical Psychology

Doctor of Counselling Psychology

DClinPsy

DCounPsy

540 credits of which no more than 120 may be at Level 7

and the remainder at

Level 8

Requires piece of AIW minimum size 180

credits, maximum 300 credits (see Doctoral

Degree Characteristic Statement)

1 https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks.pdf

6

Award PrefixMinimum

CAMS Requirements

Notes

Doctor of Education

Doctor of Business Administration

Doctor of Health Psychology

Doctor of Health & Social Care

Doctor of Public Health

Doctor of Professional Practice

EdD

DBA

DHealthPsy

DHSC

DrPH

DrPP

Doctor of Psychology PsyD 300 credits at

level 8

Only available to experienced

psychologists who are already qualified and

registered in an area of applied psychology.

Students are required to complete a Research Methods Module (60

credits) and AIW (240 credits)

Professional Practitioner Qualification

PPQ 240 credits at Level 8

Only available as an intermediate award

within specified Doctoral Psychology courses

A Professional Doctorate award is based upon a total of 540 credits (equivalent to 5400 total hours of learning) which a full-time student would normally undertake over three years. The standard module size is 20 credits with an associated learning time of 200 hours (including timetabled activity, tutor directed learning, private study and assessment).

7

Professional Doctorate course structures are devised in line with the CAMS2 Framework and consist of a series of taught modules and the development and submission of a piece of AIW. The courses will have undergone approval/review (validation), where the specific course structure, module specifications, programme specification and supporting documentation have been scrutinised by a panel including internal and external members. There may also have been involvement from Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies in the approval/review of accredited courses. Where Level 7 modules are included within the Professional Doctorate course, they are assessed using the Taught Masters Level Award Regulations available at: Taught Masters Regulations. However, progression and award will be governed by the Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards (2017-18 onwards) or the Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards (pre 2017/18) found on the Assessment Regulations Website.

The detailed structure of a Professional Doctorate course varies from award to award, although there is a requirement for a minimum of 180 credits and a maximum of 300 credits for the AIW. The word length of a piece of AIW should be commensurate with the number of credits allocated and with Level 8 qualification descriptors and should normally be between 25,000 words (180 credits) and 60,000 words (300 credits). Details of Teesside University Postgraduate Level Descriptors can be found in Annex D of this document.

All Professional Doctorate courses must also include an element of advanced research methods, defined as specific techniques required to conduct research in a particular discipline, minimally to the value of 60 credits or 600 hours of notional learning time. The course document for each Professional Doctorate award must clearly state how and where in the course this is achieved. The Course Leader should provide the AIW External Examiner with the Programme Specification for the specific Professional Doctorate course along with the detailed course structure.

Recognition of Prior Learning [RPL] PolicyThe University has approved procedures for RPL as regards both certificated (Recognition of Prior Certificated Learning [RPCL]) and experiential (Recognition of Prior Experiential Learning [RPEL]) learning. These are available at: RPL Policy.

Any RPL requirements relating to Professional Doctorate awards must be clearly specified at course approval/review. It is not expected that students will be granted RPEL against the AIW part of the Professional Doctorate Award. It is not expected that an AIW External Examiner will have a role in the RPL process. A number of Professional Doctorate Awards at Teesside University recognise up to 120 credits of RPL at Level 7 from a related Masters award (e.g., MBA against a DBA award).

2 http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/about/public_information/quality_handbook.cfm

8

3. Framework for Assessment, Award and Progression

In common with the majority of UK HEIs, the University utilises a two-tier assessment system. The first tier is concerned with individual modules or clusters of modules (Module Assessment Boards) and the second with progression and awards (Progression and Award Boards). Although Assessment Boards usually meet on a serial basis with dates co-ordinated centrally within the University, Boards may be combined provided that the agenda is structured appropriately to separate the module and progression/award issues. This will be the case for most Professional Doctorate awards. Detailed information can be found in the Terms of Reference for University Assessment Boards available on the External Examiner website under useful links. AIW External Examiners will not normally be expected to attend Assessment Boards but their recommendations will be considered at the relevant Board.

4. External Examining Process and Procedures

Appointment of AIW External ExaminerThe procedures for nominating, appointing and approving all External Examiners are detailed in the External Examiner Process, currently Section D2 of the Quality Handbook available at: External Examiner processes. Details of the Criteria for Appointment of AIW External Examiner are detailed in Appendix A5 of this document and the appointment Information is available in section 6.5 of the Professional Doctorate regulations.

All formal communication relating to the appointment of the AIW External Examiners is through the Academic Registry (Academic Policy and Regulation [APR]), at the University. The following address can be used to contact the Team: APR@tees.ac.uk

Schools have the choice of whether they appoint an AIWEE to examine an individual student, or whether they wish to appoint a number of AIWEEs to a ‘subject area’, so that they can utilise each of them as and when required. This must be indicated on the nomination form. The nomination form is available here.

All AIWEEs appointed to subject areas will normally be appointed for a period of 6 years, with the possibility of a 2-year extension in exceptional circumstances, subject to the approval of the School Student Learning and Experience Sub Committee. AIWEEs appointed to examine an individual student will normally be for a period of up to 30 months.

The approval process for External Examiners ensures that they have the relevant qualifications and experience for the roles that they will be asked to carry out. Where a nomination is for a person without previous experience of acting as an External Examiner, there should be a clearly indicated balance of experience within the rest of the External Examiner Team.

9

The AIW External Examiner should not: Have had any formal association with the University for a period of at

least five years prior to appointment as an AIWEE; have taken part in advising the student on the AIW; have acted previously as the student’s supervisor; have acted as research collaborator; be either a supervisor of another student or an External Examiner on a

taught course in the same School at the University; be associated with the sponsorship of students at the University; be required to assess colleagues as students; be in a position to influence significantly, the future employment of

students on the course; be involved with student placements or training in their employing

organisation; be registered for a Professional Doctorate or Research Degree either at

Teesside University or another institution.

The Student Learning & Experience Committee reserves the right to terminate the appointment of any External Examiner. This would normally occur when an External Examiner was unable, unwilling, or incapable of fulfilling their duties (e.g. non-submission of an Annual Report within the specified period).

Relationship of the AIW External Examiner to the Award External ExaminerAIW External Examiners are appointed specifically to examine the AIW stage of a designated Professional Doctorate course as part of an Examining Team. The University will also appoint an Award External Examiner for each Professional Doctorate course. The Award External Examiner normally acts as the Module External Examiner for the AIW.

AIW External Examiner recommendations on the AIW will, therefore, normally be considered under the oversight of the Award Examiner. The Progression/Award Board will give appropriate consideration of the reports and recommendations of the AIW Examiners before reaching a decision on the progression/award of the student.

Terms of Reference of the AIW External ExaminerThe principal objective of the AIW External Examiner is to ensure, using their expert judgement, in relation to the AIW and the Oral Examination [viva] (or alternative form of examination3, the performance of, and standards achieved by, students are comparable with their peers on similar courses elsewhere in higher education. Comment is also sought on the AIW assessment process.

To achieve this, the AIW External Examiner is required to:

Undertake provisional consideration of the AIW and provide a Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation

3 NOTE: Where, for reasons of sickness, disability or comparable valid cause, the Assessment Board is satisfied that the candidate would be under serious disadvantage if required to undergo an oral examination.

10

Attend the oral defence of the AIW (or alterative) Provide a Recommendation to the relevant Assessment Board, under the

oversight of the Award External Examiner, following the oral examination of a candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award

Undertake any reassessment activities as may be required including completion of reports on re-submitted AIW and attendance at any repeat oral examination

Present specific reports relating to the examination of the AIW. Relevant proformas are available in Annex B (2017/18 Assessment regulations and onwards) and Annex C (pre 2017/18 Assessment regulations).

Annual Report of the AIW External Examiner (Appendix A1)Where an AIW External Examiner has undertaken an examination(s) during the academic year, the AIW External Examiner is required to produce an Annual Report which is a key feature of the University’s Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement process in assuring national comparability of the University’s awards and in quality assurance and enhancement. However, if the AIW External Examiner has not undertaken any examinations in that academic year a report is not required. Details of the reporting process can be found in Section 9 of the External Examiner Handbook available on the External Examiner Website.

Where an Annual Report is required, the front page of the template will have been completed. If the Annual Report template is not received, a report can be made available by sending your request to APR@tees.ac.uk .

In the Report, the AIW External Examiner is asked to address:

the sufficiency of opportunity provided for involvement with, and discussion of, the AIW and its assessment (including the Oral Examination).

the conduct of the Oral Examination and associated processes. the standard of achievement in the AIW and Oral Examination including:

o The performance of students in relation to their peers on comparable assessments at this level elsewhere in UK HEI’s;

o Whether the quality of knowledge and skills (both general and specific) demonstrated by students are appropriate to the level of study;

o Evidence that students are achieving the Learning Outcomes for the AIW module.

specifically identify good practice and recommendations for future enhancement to the Course Team and the University.

confirm, or otherwise, that you are satisfied that any previous concerns, made by you as an AIW External Examiner, have been noted and acted upon, as appropriate.

where the tenure is due to end shortly, there is the opportunity to produce a brief summary on the overall experience as an AIW External Examiner at Teesside University.

11

This Report should be submitted electronically to APR@tees.ac.uk by 30 September each year. Reports are received by the Academic Registry on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor and forwarded onto relevant Schools. More detailed information on the process can be found in the External Examiner Handbook.

Failure to submit an Annual Report, when required, will result in non-payment of your fees and may result in the termination of your contract.

Reports which do not conform to the University format and/or do not answer all the questions, or include the names of individuals will be returned to the AIW External Examiner to complete and any fees will be withheld pending completion and return.

Responsibility of the University to the AIW External Examiner

To ensure that AIW External Examiners can efficiently carry out their duties, the University will:

provide the AIW External Examiners at the start of their period of office with:o a contract letter;o link to the AIW External Examiner Handbook and to provide, on an

annual basis, any updates of this documentation; identify to the AIW External Examiner a named contact in the School

(normally the Course Leader) and the Senior School Administrator or nominee.

maintain the University’s Student Information System (SITS) records for the AIW External Examiner including their period of office.

direct the AIW External Examiner to the appropriate website to obtain the most up to date Assessment & Progression Regulations and inform them of any variances to the Regulations approved by the University Academic Board relating to the AIW External Examiner.

negotiate a timescale for the despatch of the AIW and the associated assessment criteria to allow adequate time for consideration and response by the AIW External Examiner prior to the date of the oral examination.

provide an initial indication of the date of the oral examination and subsequently negotiate date(s) for the oral examination(s).

where necessary, negotiate a timescale for the despatch of documentation relating to any reassessment of AIW and/or date of repeat oral examination if required.

ensure that the AIW External Examiner receives the minutes and recommendations of relevant Assessment Boards on request4.

ensure that the AIW External Examiner is given the required documentation for annual reporting (where required) and for claiming expenses.

44 NOTE: AIWEEs do not normally attend Module/Progression/Award Boards but their comments are fed into the Board through the overview of the Award Examiner.

12

“prompt” AIW External Examiners for annual reports due and not received by 30 September in any academic year.

acknowledge receipt of annual reports, ensure that the AIW External Examiner Reports are considered and that the AIW External Examiner is responded to in writing, with regard to any issues raised, and informed of actions taken in a timely way.

maintain a file of AIW External Examiner annual reports. collect and collate issues and good practice identified by External

Examiners and produce an Annual Overview Report to the Academic Board, reviewing national comparability of standards as reported by External Examiners, reporting on procedural compliance, identifying areas of common concern which may affect standards and highlighting areas of good practice.

forward a copy of all reports to School Associate Deans with responsibility for Learning & Teaching and School Senior Administrators (or nominee) for onward transmission to appropriate Course Teams.

provide the External Examiner Sub-Committee with a report detailing AIW External Examiner tenure end dates to ensure that replacement examiners are appointed in a timely manner.

maintain a Conflict of Interest database to ensure that there are no clashes of interest between staff at Teesside University who act as External Examiners at other institutions, and External Examiners contracted to Teesside University.

5. Assessment of the Advanced Independent Work [AIW]

2017/18 and subsequent RegulationsSection 6 of the Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards provides details of the requirements for the AIW including General Provisions, Supervision, Requirements for the AIW, Examination of the AIW (Section 6.4), Examiners, Examination Procedures (Section 6.6), Re-examination (Section 6.7). It is recommended that AIW External Examiners refer to this document, particularly sections 6.4 and 6.6 in preparation for the Examination of the AIW in relation to the preliminary assessment of the AIW and defence by oral (or approved alternative) examination. Proformas for reporting and recording recommendations are included in Annex B of this Handbook (Appendices B1-B5). Further guidance can be provided by the Course Leader.

Pre 2017 Regulations Section 6 of the Assessment Regulations for Professional Doctorate Awards provides details of the requirements for the AIW including General Provisions, Supervision, Requirements for the AIW, Regulations for the AIW (Section 6.5), Examiners, Examination Procedures (Section 6.6), First Examination (Section 6.8), Re-examination (Section 6.9). It is recommended that AIW External Examiners refer to this document, particularly sections 6.5 and 6.6 in preparation for the Examination of the AIW in relation to the preliminary assessment of the AIW and defence by oral (or approved alternative) examination. Proformas for reporting and recording recommendations are

13

included in Annex C of this Handbook (Appendices C1 – C4). Further guidance can be provided by the Course Leader.

6. Research Ethics

The University has developed a set of six Research Ethics Principles supplemented by the “Policy, Procedures and Guidelines for Research Ethics”, which is available from Research Ethics. Section 1.2.3 of the document makes specific reference to ethical clearance for Professional Doctorate projects (AIW).

Ethical Clearance is obtained by application to the relevant School Research Ethics Sub-Committee (SRESC) before research commences.

7. Other Relevant Academic Regulations

7.1 Extenuating CircumstancesIt is the responsibility of individual students to notify their School of any extenuating circumstances that they feel may have affected their performance in assessments. These circumstances will be considered by the relevant Mitigating Circumstances Board. Only those extenuating circumstances that are accepted by the Mitigating Circumstances Board will be identified at the subsequent Assessment Board. See the University Extenuating Circumstances Regulations.

7.2 Academic AppealThe University Academic Board [UAB] has established the principle that the decisions of an Assessment Board should not be overturned if the Assessment Board has been properly constituted, has acted within its Terms of Reference, and has applied current Regulations. However, UAB may ask an Assessment Board to reconsider a decision. UAB has established an Academic Appeals Committee [AAC] to undertake responsibility for the consideration of applications for Academic Appeal. See the University Academic Appeal Regulations.

7.3 Academic MisconductAcademic Misconduct is unacceptable conduct for any member of the University community. The work submitted by a student for assessment should, therefore, have been carried out by the student. Any attempt to potentially "pass off" the work of others as if it were one's own is, therefore, an offence and UAB has established Regulations to penalise those found guilty of such offences.

External Examiners are not required to comment on the work of individual students who have committed an academic misconduct offence in a taught piece of work. However, there will be an opportunity for relevant External

14

Examiners to comment on the application of the Academic Misconduct Regulations at the appropriate Assessment Board Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes).

In exceptional cases, an AIW External Examiner may suspect possible academic misconduct in the AIW, either prior to the oral examination, or during the examination (where, for example, a student was not familiar with the content of the AIW suggesting it may have been written by someone other than the student, or suspicions relating to data etc.). Where an AIW External Examiners suspects possible academic misconduct prior to the oral examination, they should contact the Course Leader as soon as possible and the oral examination would be postponed pending investigation using the Regulations relating to Research Misconduct in Advanced Independent Work (AIW) on Professional Doctorate Programmes which can be found here. If the Examiner(s) became suspicious during the oral examination, the Examiner(s) should proceed with oral examination and reach an academic decision to be recommended to the Assessment Board pending investigation of possible misconduct and the student would be informed of this at the conclusion of the oral examination.

15

Annex A: General Information, Forms and Guidance for all AIW External Examiners

Appendix A1Updated November 2019

External Examiner Sub-Committee

Appendix A1 Guidance Note and Annual Reports for AIW External Examiners

Where an AIW External Examiner has undertaken an examination(s) within the Academic Year, they are required to submit an Annual Report by 30th September that year, covering the previous 12 months.

External Examiners are required to submit only one Annual Report per year covering all AIW examined.

The University requests that External Examiners do not refer directly to individual staff or students within the Annual Report, as it is made available for discussion widely in the University by staff and students.

The completed Report must be submitted electronically to Academic Registry via APR@tees.ac.uk by 30 September each year. Please note that fees will not be paid until the completed Report has been received by Academic Registry. Non-submission of an Annual Report, where required, may lead to the termination of the External Examiner Contract.

Electronic versions of the Annual Report Template are available from Academic Registry via APR@tees.ac.uk. However, if it is not possible to provide an electronic copy, a word processed copy is acceptable and this should be addressed to the Academic Registry (APR), Teesside University, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BX.

For Advanced Independent Work External Examiners, the University requires an indication of whether, in their expert judgement, the standards of the Advanced Independent Work and Oral Examination (or other approved alternative) are appropriate and comparable to other students qualifying at doctorate level (Level 8). Comment is also sought on the assessment process.

Please note that if you have identified a matter of significant concern in Box 8 of the Report, Part Three of the Report (School’s Response), will be completed by the relevant School following receipt of your Report and returned to you, normally within 20 working days.

Thank you for your contribution to supporting our quality assurance processes.

Annual Report Form for Professional Doctorate Advanced Independent Work [AIW] External Examiners

Payment of the External Examiner Fee is dependent

upon receipt of this Report by Academic Registry. Please

forward this report to Academic Registry who will submit your report to the relevant School.

PART ONE (A): To be completed by the School before despatch to the AIW External Examiner

School:Academic Year:

Title of Professional Doctorate Course:

Total number of AIW Examined:Name of External Examiner:

Role of External Examiner (delete as applicable):

Award External Examiner Module External ExaminerAIW External Examiner Individual Student Subject Area

PART ONE (B): To be completed by External Examiner:Please indicate your answer by including an X in the appropriate box. Yes* No

Are any of the above details incorrect?Conflict of interest – In the last 12 months, has there been any changes that would create a conflict of interest with your appointment as External Examiner at Teesside University? *If you have answered YES to the above questions, please provide details below:

Date of Report completion:

18

PART TWO: To be completed by ALL External Examiners

This Section of the Report is intended to help the University monitor overall standards and assessment processes.

1. Positive Features:Please comment on positive aspects of the student learning experience which you would like to highlight as innovative or good practice, which could be disseminated across the University as examples of good practice.

2. Academic Standards: YES NO*a) Is student performance in the Advanced Independent Work comparable

with similar courses / subjects in other UK institutions with which you are familiar?

b) Is the quality of knowledge and skills (both general and subject specific) in the Advanced Independent Work appropriate to the level of study?

*If you answered NO to any of these questions, please provide details in Box 7 or Box 8.

3. Administrative Processes: YES NO*Were you provided, in a timely manner, with sufficient information to carry out your duties and responsibilities as an AIW External Examiner?*If you answered NO to the above question, please provide details below:

4. Assessment Process: YES NO*Were you provided with sufficient opportunity to be involved with and to discuss, the assessment of the Advanced Independent Work prior to the Oral Examination (viva)?*If you answered NO to this question, please provide details in Box 7 or Box 8.

5. Conduct of the Oral Examination: YES NO*

a) Are you satisfied with the conduct of the Oral Examination and associated processes?

*If you answered NO, please provide details in Box 7 or Box 8.

6. Student Learning Experience: YES NO*a) On the basis of the assessed work you have examined, is there evidence

that students are achieving the learning outcomes of the Advanced Independent Work?

*If you answered NO, please provide details in Box 7 or Box 8.

19

Please use Box 7 to identify minor concerns with suggestions for enhancement, and Box 8 where you have significant concerns about the academic provision, which you feel needs to be addressed to maintain and enhance quality and standards. You will receive a response to any significant concerns mentioned in this Report.

7. Suggestions for Enhancement: YES* NODo you have any other minor concerns or comments with recommendations which might assist in promoting enhancement of the Advanced Independent Work?*If YES, please provide details here.

8. Matters of Significant Concern: YES* NODo you have any significant concerns about the professional doctorate which you feel must be addressed to maintain and enhance quality and standards?*If YES, please provide details here, in order to secure appropriate action.

You will be provided with a formal response to significant concerns mentioned in this Report.

9. Unsatisfactory Responses to Previous Significant Concerns: N/A YES NO*Where applicable, are you satisfied that significant concerns raised in Box 8 of your previous reports have been appropriately addressed?*If NO, please provide details here indicating the nature of the concern and when it was raised.

10.

External Examiners for Whom this is their Last Annual Report:

Please provide a brief statement on your overall experience as an AIW External Examiner at Teesside University.

20

11.

Additional Comments:

If you wish to comment on any other aspects of this provision – not covered by the above – please do so here.

Thank you very much for completing this proforma. Your feedback is an important part of the University’s quality assurance process.

Please return the completed proforma to either:

Electronic copy: APR@tees.ac.uk

Paper copy: Senior Quality OfficerAcademic Registry (APR)3rd Floor, Middlesbrough TowerTeesside UniversityMIDDLESBROUGHTS1 3BX

As a Teesside University External Examiner, I acknowledge that in certain circumstances, where the findings of my Report would expose the HEI to legal liabilities or unfairly damage its reputation, the publication of this information may need to be delayed or withheld.

21

PART 3: SCHOOL’S RESPONSE (to be completed by the School and returned to the External Examiner if they have identified a matter of significant concern in Box 8)

Schools are required to respond to all concerns mentioned in Box 8 by External Examiners in their Reports.

Name of External Examiner:

School:

Academic Year:Course and Title of AIW(s) considered:

Response from Teesside UniversityThis Section will be completed by the appropriate School and will form part of its process of Continuous Monitoring and Enhancement, including the sharing of information with students.

Response completed by:

Signed by Chair of SSLESC:

Date:

IMPORTANT: If a concern has been raised in Box 8, please send Academic Registry a copy of the response sent to the External Examiner to APR@tees.ac.uk

External Examiners have the authority to report directly to the Vice-Chancellor if they are seriously concerned about standards of assessment and performance, particularly where they consider assessments are being conducted in a way that jeopardises either the fair treatment of students or the standard of University awards, or other matters of particular importance or sensitivity. If an External Examiner is not satisfied with the response from the Vice Chancellor and they have exhausted the University’s internal procedures, as a last resort the External Examiner may notify the Quality Assurance Agency via the QAA Concerns Scheme.

22

Appendix A2 External Examiner Expense Form

External Examiner Expenses Form[to be authorised by Schools, then forwarded to Payroll]

Expenses should normally be submitted within one month of incurring expenses. Fees are paid automatically on receipt of your Annual Report and paid separately to your expenses. You do not need to claim for your fee on this form.

SECTION A: PERSONAL DETAILSSurname: Forenames:

Title: Prof/Dr/Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms(delete as appropriate) School/Partner:

SECTION B: DETAILS OF EXTERNAL EXAMINER EXPENSESDate(s) of Attendance:

Details of Expenses Claimed (please supply receipts for all claims where possible): Amount

Taxis:From: To:

From: To:Public Transport (usually reimbursed at second class):From: To:

From: To:Subsistence:

Car Mileage (number of miles travelled): ………From: To:

From: To:Accommodation(if not previously arranged by School) Number of Nights .........

TOTAL £

Signature of Claimant: Date:

SECTION C: TO BE COMPLETED BY SCHOOLS AUTHORISATIONSigned (Budgetary Head)

Signature: Date:

Payroll Number:

Cost Centre to be Charged:

23

Appendix A3

Appendix A3 External Examiner Annual Fees

NOTE: The fee will only be paid once per academic year following receipt of an Annual Report when an examination(s) has taken place. All fees (including mentoring fees) paid to External Examiners are subject to deduction of PAYE in line with HMRC regulations.

ADVANCED INDEPENDENT WORK EXTERNAL EXAMINER FEES £100 per piece of work up to and including 180 credits £150 per piece of work, greater than 180 credits Plus, a repeat fee of £50, if applicable.

The number of Advance Independent Work examined is capped at 6 per year.

Please note that the Finance and Commercial Department [FCD] will not sanction the payment of any fees until a completed External Examiner Annual Report Form has been received by the Academic Registry and the Human Resources Department has received confirmation from the School/Campus Services that your original Passport has been verified in accordance with UKVI requirements.

EXPENSESExpenses are paid at the discretion of the School and the University has no specific rules relating to the level and type of expenses incurred by External Examiners but expects that:

public transport will be used wherever possible. This is normally interpreted as second-class rail travel, although Schools may agree alternatives such as air travel where this is necessary;

use of own car will be funded on the basis of the current University Subsistence & Travel Allowance Rates issued by the Finance and Commercial Development department;

Schools will normally make hotel reservations on behalf of External Examiners;

the University’s normal Subsistence Rates will apply, unless otherwise agreed, detailed on the External Examiner website.

Schools are requested to explore expenses with External Examiners prior to their first visit, so as to agree a mutually acceptable basis on which expenses will be incurred and funded.

24

All expenses must be submitted on a Teesside University Expenses Claim Form (Appendix 2) in accordance with the requirements set out in the External Examiner Handbook. These claim forms, including relevant receipts, must be sent to the relevant School Senior Administrator at Teesside University, within one month of incurring the expenses.

25

Appendix A4

Appendix A4 Information Governance

Comments by an External Examiner about the performance of an individual candidate may be personal data and so available to a student under the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018, referred to in this document as Data Protection Legislation (DPL).  This applies to comments and opinions made by Internal or External Examiners, whether they are on an examination script or a separate marking script.  Information that does not relate to specific individuals, such as External Examiners’ Reports, may be publicly accessible under the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA).

Examination scripts are considered to be “personal data” under DPL. Due care must be taken to keep them secure and confidential in accordance with the Data Protection Principles.

Examiners are advised that written comments may be liable to disclosure to the subject of the comments or to other agencies/individuals as required or permitted by law and should, therefore, be intelligible and appropriate.

Comments relating to specific examination scripts should ideally be made on attached sheets rather than directly onto the scripts.

Where comments are handwritten and potentially illegible, it may be necessary to provide a word-processed version to fulfil the requirements under both the DPL and FoIA to provide information in an intelligible format.

Any files that have been downloaded during the assessment process that may contain student’s work, grades or personal details, should be deleted from External Examiner devices immediately. This is to ensure the University’s compliance with the requirements and safeguards of the General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018, to protect the rights and privacy of individuals.

26

Appendix A5

External Examiner Sub-Committee

Appendix A5 Criteria for Appointing AIW External Examiner

QUALIFICATIONS Appropriate to the subject and normally at doctorate level.

No student registered for a Professional Doctorate or research degree, either at this or another institution, shall act as an examiner.

EXPERIENCE Experienced in research in the general area of the candidate’s Advanced Independent Work and, where practicable, have experience as a specialist in the topic(s) to be examined.

Previous experience of external examining is desirable, unless working within an experienced team. Nominees that have no previous experience require a description of support available from the School.

Where possible, substantial experience (i.e. two or more previous examinations) of examining Advanced Independent Work for Professional Doctorate students.

Normally, no more than two current external examining posts held by the nominee at any educational institution.

KNOWLEDGE Advanced knowledge of the academic discipline to be examined.

Where practicable, experience as a specialist in the topic(s) to be examined.

EMPLOYMENT STATUS Members of professional, statutory or regulatory bodies, and individuals from industry or commerce, not employed in academic institutions, will be considered on their merits.

Retired persons who have continued their professional engagement will also be considered.

CONNECTIONS WITH TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY

Former staff, students, or External Examiners of the University may not be considered within a 3 year period of the end of that relationship.

The AIW External Examiner should not:

have taken part in advising the student on the AIW; have acted previously as the student’s supervisor or

normally, as research collaborator; be either a supervisor of another student or an External

Examiner on a taught course in the same School or Department at the University;

be associated with the sponsorship of students at the

27

University; be in a position to influence significantly, the future

employment of students on the course be involved with student placements or training in their

employing organisation be required to assess colleagues from their own

institutions/organisations be registered for a professional doctorate or research

degree either at this or another institution.CONNECTIONS WITH NOMINEE’S INSTITUTION

A proposed External Examiner must not normally be from the same institution as another member of the external examining team.

A proposed External Examiner must not normally be from an institution where a member of Teesside University staff is an External Examiner in a cognate subject.

A proposed External Examiner must not normally be from the same institution as the retiring External Examiner.

NOTE: See also section 6.5.5 of the Professional Doctorate Assessment Regulations.

28

Annex B: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (2017/18 Regulations and onwards only)

29

Appendix B1PROFDOCAIW1701

CONFIDENTIAL

Appendix B1 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner for the Advanced Independent Work of a Candidate for a Professional

Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)

Each Examiner is required to read and examine the AIW and submit an independent preliminary report on it, normally to the Course Leader (or nominee) and normally at least three working days before any oral examination (or alternative form of examination) is held, for exchange between the examiners.

In completing the Preliminary Report, each examiner shall, where possible, make an appropriate provisional recommendation subject to the outcome of any oral examination. Except where otherwise authorised by the examiners, the contents of the reports will be held in confidence between the examiners and (following the oral examination) by the relevant Assessment Board (See Regulation 6.6)

NOTE: Where the examiners are of the opinion that the AIW is so unsatisfactory that no useful purpose would be served by conducting an oral examination (or alternative), they may recommend that the Assessment Board dispense with the oral examination (or alternative) and refer the AIW for reassessment. In such cases the examiners should provide the Assessment Board with written guidance for the candidate covering the deficiencies of the AIW (Regulation 6.6.8).

1. The Candidate

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Tick applicable title:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]

Title of AIW:

Date of oral (or alternative) examination:

2. Name of *External/Internal Examiner:(*delete as appropriate)

3. Report of the Examiner on the AIW

30

The Examiner is requested to give a reasoned assessment of the candidate's performance of around 300-500 words in length. Professional Doctorate students are expected to demonstrate within the oral examination (or agreed alternative) a systematic understanding and analysis of a substantial body of knowledge at the forefront of an area of policy or practice, the extension of the area’s frontier by the creation of new knowledge and a detailed and critical understanding of advanced research techniques/problems within a discipline. The following questions are intended to provide some guidance, but the report will, of course, reflect the subject area of the AIW with regards to the areas covered:

Was the nature and purpose of the research made clear and was this substantially achieved?

Is the abstract/synopsis an adequate summary of the work presented? If the chosen topic raises ethical issues, are these adequately considered? To what extent does the AIW demonstrate that the candidate has an appropriate

understanding of the subject and knowledge of the literature? Is there coverage of recent and relevant literature in the field of study which shows critical

appraisal and original synthesis? Is there an understanding of the theoretical field associated with the study? Is the linkage

and balance between practical investigation and theory satisfactory? Has the candidate chosen the appropriate methodology for the study? Is the

methodology then used effectively? Are the findings interpreted in a valid way? What evidence is there of independent critical and analytical skills, and the ability to

evaluate evidence? To what extent does the AIW show evidence of originality and make a contribution to

knowledge? Does it contain matter suitable for publication? Is the AIW clearly written and presented? Is the style and structure of the AIW

satisfactory? (NOTE: The work must be submitted in accordance with Guidelines as detailed in the Research Handbook for each course. Information is also provided in Regulation 6.3.7 and 6.3.8).

What is your view of the overall quality of the research described in the AIW?

NOTE: Where a recommendation of Reassessment prior to Oral examination is made, written guidance should be provided for the candidate covering the deficiencies of the AIW. The examiners shall not recommend that a candidate fail the AIW without providing an opportunity to hold an oral or other alternative examination.

31

Name of Candidate:

REPORT:

4. Provisional RecommendationNote: If the Examiner wishes to suspend judgement until after the oral examination this should be

stated below. If the candidate's performance in the oral examination is such as to necessitate an amendment to the recommendation made on this form, the final recommendation should be stated on form PROFDOCAIW1702 – see Regulation 6.6.

5. Examiner’s Signature

Signed: Date:

32

Appendix B2PROFDOCAIW1702

CONFIDENTIAL

Appendix B2 Recommendation of the Examiners following Oral [or agreed alternative] Examination of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award

(2017/18 onwards)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the oral or alternative examination, the result of the examination as a whole and the recommendations to the Award/Progression Board.

Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately [Reg. 6.6.5].

1. The Candidate

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Tick applicable title:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]

Title of AIW:Date of oral (or agreed alternative) examination:

2. Oral Examination TeamNames of the Examiners present at the viva:External Examiner(s):

Internal Examiner(s):

Independent Non-Examining Chair: [Reg 6.4.4 refers]Names of supervisor present, if any:

33

3. Report of the Examiners on the oral examination – Examiners are requested to report below on the oral examination of the candidate giving a reasoned assessment of the candidate’s performance.

3.1 Are you satisfied that the AIW presented is the candidate's own work? Yes/No

3.2 Did the candidate show a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of: (i) Matters relating to the AIW? Yes/No

(ii) Background studies to the subject of the AIW? Yes/No

3.3 Other comments on the Candidate’s performance in the oral examination:This may be forwarded to the candidate (see also Question 8)

4. Please state whether the candidate was absent from the oral examination at any time with/without the Examiners’ agreement, the nature and the length of the absence, and actions taken as a result of the absence.

5. Report of the Examiners where an alternative examination has been approved. [Reg 6.4.2 ]

Where an alternative form of examination has been approved by the University a report on the candidate's performance should be given below; the form of examination must be specified.

6. Further comment (if any) on the AIW:

If the provisional recommendations of the Examiners in their independent preliminary reports were not in agreement, or the Examiners have changed their views, an explanatory statement of the final joint recommendation must be made below. If the Examiners are not in agreement and are, therefore, completing separate copies of this form, details of the disagreement should be stated below and, where appropriate, be related to the preliminary report [Reg 6.6.5, 6.6.6]).

34

The Examiners are asked to come to one of two Conclusions and, by completing Sections 7 OR 8, to indicate whether or not the candidate has satisfied them for the award for which they have been examined, and to make Recommendations appropriate to their Conclusions, Either:

7. Conclusion – AWARD Recommended (Please tick appropriate boxes):

The candidate has satisfied the Examiners as a candidate for the degree of: ☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Health & Social Care [DHSC]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH]

and the Examiners Recommend: Please tick either a) or b) below:

a) that the candidate be granted the Professional Doctorate Award named above [Reg 6.6.3 a]; or

b) that the candidate be awarded the Professional Doctorate Award subject to amendments and corrections being made to the AIW to the satisfaction of the *Internal Examiner and/or External Examiner(s) within a period of ______ *days/weeks/months from written notification (subject to a maximum of six months). [Reg 6.6.3 b), 6.6.4]. (A list of the amendments must be submitted separately.)

8. Conclusion – AWARD NOT Recommended (Please tick appropriate boxes and make additional comments).

The candidate has NOT satisfied the Examiners as a candidate for the degree of:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]in the following respects (a full report of the required revisions/deficiencies of the AIW must be submitted separately):

35

and the Examiners Recommend: (the Examiners are requested to tick the Recommendation(s) that apply(ies)),

that the candidate be permitted to re-submit for the Professional Doctorate Award named above and be re-examined as detailed below [Reg 6.6.3 c, 6.7.3)]:

and one of the following: (*please tick as appropriate)

(i) *that the candidate re-submit the AIW and undertake a further oral examination or approved alternative examination (AIW with oral); [6.7.3a] or

(ii) *that the candidate re-submit the AIW and if the examiners, on re-examination, certify that the AIW as revised is satisfactory, then the student may not require an oral examination or approved alternative (AIW only); [6.7.3b] or

(iii) *that the candidate be re-examined in the oral and/or other examination(s) without being requested to revise and submit the AIW (Oral examination only), [6.7.3c]

(iv) *that the first examination of the candidate’s AIW was so unsatisfactory that the Assessment Board dispensed with the oral examination, and the re-examination shall include a re-examination of the AIW and an oral or approved alternative examination (refer prior to oral (see 6.6.8)) [6.7.3d]; or

(v) *that the performance of the candidate in relation to other requirements of the award was not satisfactory and a different form of re-examination is proposed. This will require the approval of the relevant assessment board. Please provide details of the proposed form of re-examination. [6.7.3e]

ORthat the candidate fails the AIW and not be permitted to re-submit and be re-examined [Reg 6.6.3 d]:

9. Please add any matters of feedback that you would wish to be given to the candidate on their work (this is in addition to any list of required amendments or revisions and also in the case of students whose awards are recommended without amendments e.g. their work, advice on publication, performance in the oral examination, other matters of relevance to their research).

10. Signed (Examiners)

Date:

36

Name of Candidate:

11. Comments of Independent Non-Examining Chair in relation to conduct of oral examination (if applicable)

Signed Independent Non-Examining Chair

Date:

12. The Recommendations were ratified by the Award/Progression Board:Name of Board: Date of

Board:

Or Through Chair’s Action on:

37

Appendix B3PROFDOCAIW1703

CONFIDENTIAL

Appendix B3 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidates Resubmission of AIW for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18

onwards)

The Examiner should read and examine the AIW and complete the preliminary report. Each examiner shall consider whether the AIW provisionally satisfies the requirements of the award and, where possible, make an appropriate provisional recommendation subject to the outcome of any oral examination, or without the need for further oral being held [Reg 6.7.4].

1. The Candidate

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Tick applicable title:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]

Title of AIW:

2 Name of Examiner(s):(*Please use (I) Internal or (E) External as appropriate)

3 Report of the Examiner on the AIW submitted

Does the resubmitted AIW satisfactorily address matters relating to deficiencies identified in the first submission? If NO, please expand in “Section 4, Report”.

YES/NO

38

Name of Candidate:

4 Report: To be used to comment on revised AIW and to supplement a “NO” answer to question 3. A Report of about 300 words should suffice.

39

Name of Candidate:

5 Recommendation (Please tick) Note: If the Examiner wishes to suspend judgement until after the oral examination (or

approved alternative) this should be stated below (d). If the candidate's subsequent performance in the oral examination is such as to necessitate an amendment to the recommendation made on this form, the final recommendation should be stated on form PROFDOCAIW1705.

a)The AIW has been resubmitted to my satisfaction and I recommend the Professional Doctorate Award detailed in Section 1 should be made without the need for further oral examination [Reg 6.7.6 a)].

Or b):That the Professional Doctorate Award should be made subject to amendments and corrections being made to the AIW to the satisfaction of the *Internal Examiner and/or External Examiner(s) within a period of ______ *days/weeks/months from written notification (subject to a maximum of six months). [Reg 6.7.6 b)]. (A list of the amendments must be submitted separately.)

Or c):The AIW resubmitted is not satisfactory. The student should not pass the AIW and not be permitted to be re-examined [Reg 6.7.6 c), 6.7.10]. In this case an agreed statement should be prepared by the examiners as detailed in regulation 6.7.11.

Or d):I wish to reserve judgement on a recommendation pending the outcome of a further oral examination.

6 Examiner’s Signature (If returning a copy electronically, please also post a signed copy with the AIW.)

Signed: Date:

7 The Recommendations were ratified by the

…………………………………. Award/Progression Board on:

Or through Chair’s Action on:

40

Appendix B4PROFDOCAIW1704

CONFIDENTIAL

Appendix B4 Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate’s Performance in a Repeat Oral Examination for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the repeat oral examination of the candidate where such an examination is required.Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately.

1. The Candidate

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Tick applicable title:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]

Title of AIW:

Date of repeat oral or alternative) examination:Please indicate if this is a second repeat oral examination.

2 Name of Examiner(s):(*Please use (I) Internal (E) External as appropriate)

3 Report of the Examiner on the Oral Examination

Did the student give a satisfactory performance in the oral examination and address any deficiencies identified in the first oral examination? If NO, please expand in “Section 5, Report”.

YES/NO

4 Please state whether the candidate was absent from the oral examination at any time with/without the Examiners’ agreement, the nature and the length of the absence, and actions taken as a result of the absence [Independent non-examining Chair to complete].

41

Name of Candidate:

5 Report: To be used to comment on repeat oral examination and to supplement a “NO” answer to questions 3. A Report of about 300 words should suffice.

6 Report of the Examiners where an alternative examination has been approved. [Reg 6.4.2]

Where an alternative form of examination has been approved by the University a report on the candidate's performance should be given below; the form of examination must be specified.

42

7 Recommendation (Please tick)

a):The performance in the oral/alternative examination was satisfactory and the candidate may be awarded the Professional Doctorate named in 1. [Reg 6.7.6a)]

Or b):The performance in the oral/alternative examination was satisfactory and the candidate may be awarded the Professional Doctorate named in 1, subject to the amendments indicated in Form PROFDOCAIW03 [Reg 6.7.6b)].

Or c):The performance in the oral examination was not satisfactory. The student should not pass the Professional Doctorate award and not be permitted to be re-examined [Reg 6.7.6c)].

6 Examiner’s Signature(s) (If returning a copy electronically, please also post a signed copy.)Signed: Date:

7 The Recommendations were ratified by the……………………………….. Award/Progression Board on:

Or through Chair’s Action on:

43

Appendix B5PROFDOCAIW1705

CONFIDENTIAL

Appendix B5 Final Recommendations of Examiner (s) following Amendments to AIW for a Professional Doctorate Award (2017/18 onwards)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the final recommendations following amendments to AIW for a Professional Doctorate award.Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately.

Candidate’s Name:

School:

Award:

Tick applicable title:☐ Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]☐ Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]☐ Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]☐ Doctor of Education [EdD]☐ Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]☐ Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]☐ Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] ☐ Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]

AIW Title:

Name of Examiner(s)Please indicate whether you are an:(I) Internal or (E) External (s)

44

Name of Candidate:

Tick either

I confirm that the above candidate’s AIW has been amended to my satisfaction.Or

The above candidate’s AIW has not been amended to my satisfaction in the following respects:

[Reg 6.7.12]

Signed:

Name (Please print): Internal / External Examiner*

Date:

The Examiner(s) Final Recommendations were ratified by the ……………………………………. Progression/Award Board held on:ORThrough Chairs Action on:

45

Annex C: Forms for the Assessment of Professional Doctorate Awards (Pre 2017/18 Regulations only)

46

Appendix C1

TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY PROFDOCAIW01

Appendix C1 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on the Advanced Independent Work of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award

(Pre 2017/18 only)

Each Examiner is required to read and examine the AIW and submit an independent preliminary report on it, normally to the Course Leader (or nominee) and normally at least three working days before any oral examination (or alternative form of examination) is held, for exchange between the examiners.

In completing the Preliminary Report, each examiner shall, where possible, make an appropriate provisional recommendation subject to the outcome of any oral examination. Except where otherwise authorised by the examiners, the contents of the reports will be held in confidence between the examiners and (following the oral examination) by the relevant Assessment Board (See Regulation 6.6)

NOTE: Where the examiners are of the opinion that the AIW is so unsatisfactory that no useful purpose would be served by conducting an oral examination (or alternative), they may recommend that the Assessment Board dispense with the oral examination (or alternative) and refer the AIW for reassessment. In such cases the examiners should provide the Assessment Board with written guidance for the candidate covering the deficiencies of the AIW (Regulation 6.6.8).

1. The Candidate

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any: Professional Doctorate Award:

Title of AIW:

Date of oral (viva voce) examination:

2. Name of *External/Internal Examiner:(*delete as appropriate)

3. Report of the Examiner on the AIW

47

The Examiner is requested to give a reasoned assessment of the candidate's performance of around 300-500 words in length. Professional Doctorate students are expected to demonstrate within the oral examination a systematic understanding and analysis of a substantial body of knowledge at the forefront of an area of policy or practice, the extension of the area’s frontier by the creation of new knowledge and a detailed and critical understanding of advanced research techniques/problems within a discipline. The following questions are intended to provide some guidance but the report will, of course, reflect the subject area of the AIW with regard to the areas covered:

1. Was the nature and purpose of the research made clear and was this substantially achieved?2. Is the abstract/synopsis an adequate summary of the work presented?3. If the chosen topic raises ethical issues, are these adequately considered?4. To what extent does the AIW demonstrate that the candidate has an appropriate understanding of the

subject and knowledge of the literature?5. Is there coverage of recent and relevant literature in the field of study which shows critical appraisal

and original synthesis?6. Is there an understanding of the theoretical field associated with the study? Is the linkage and balance

between practical investigation and theory satisfactory?7. Has the candidate chosen the appropriate methodology for the study? Is the methodology then used

effectively? Are the findings interpreted in a valid way?8. What evidence is there of independent critical and analytical skills, and the ability to evaluate

evidence?9. To what extent does the AIW show evidence of originality and make a contribution to knowledge?

Does it contain matter suitable for publication?10.Is the AIW clearly written and presented? Is the style and structure of the AIW satisfactory? (NOTE:

The work must be submitted in accordance with University Guidelines).11.What is your view of the overall quality of the research described in the AIW?

48

Name of Candidate:

REPORT:

4. Provisional RecommendationNote: If the Examiner wishes to suspend judgement until after the oral examination this should be stated below. If the

candidate's performance in the oral examination is such as to necessitate an amendment to the recommendation made on this form, the final recommendation should be stated on form PROFDOCAIW02.

5. Examiner’s SignatureSigned: Date:

49

Appendix C2

TEESSIDE UNIVERSITYPROFDOCAIW02

Appendix C2 Recommendation of the Examiners following Oral Examination [Viva] of a Candidate for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the oral or alternative examination, the result of the examination as a whole and the recommendations to the Award/Progression Board.Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately.

1. The Candidate:

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Title of AIW:

Date of oral examination:

2. Examination Team:Names of the Examiners present at the oral examination:External Examiner(s):

Internal Examiner(s):

Independent Non-Examining Chair, if any: [Reg 6.5.6 refers]

Names of supervisor present, if any:(Reg 6.5.5. refers)

3. Report of the Examiners on the oral examination – Examiners are requested to report below on the oral examination of the candidate giving a reasoned assessment of the candidate’s performance.

50

3.1 Are you satisfied that the AIW presented is the candidate's own work? Yes/No

3.2 Did the candidate show a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of: (i) Matters relating to the AIW? Yes/No

(ii) Background studies to the subject of the AIW? Yes/No

Name of Candidate:

3.3 Other comments on the Candidate’s performance in the oral examination:Will be forwarded to the candidate (see also Question 8)

4. Please state whether the candidate was absent from the oral examination at any time with/without the Examiners’ agreement, the nature and the length of the absence, and actions taken as a result of the absence. [Regulation 6.10 refers]

5. Report of the Examiners where an alternative examination has been approved. [Reg 6.5.2 b),6.5.4 ]

Where an alternative form of examination has been approved by the University a report on the candidate's performance should be given below; the form of examination must be specified.

6. Further comment (if any) on the AIW:If the provisional recommendations of the Examiners in their independent preliminary reports were not in agreement, or the Examiners have changed their views, an explanatory statement of the final joint recommendation must be made below. If the Examiners are not in agreement and are, therefore, completing separate copies of this form, details of the disagreement should be stated below and, where appropriate, be related to the preliminary report.

The Examiners are asked to come to one of two Conclusions and by completing Sections 7 OR 8, to indicate whether or not the candidate has satisfied them for the award for which they have been examined, and to make Recommendations appropriate to their Conclusions. Either;

51

7. Conclusion – AWARD Recommended (Please tick appropriate boxes):

The candidate has satisfied the Examiners as a candidate for the degree of: *Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]*Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]*Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]*Doctor of Education [EdD]*Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]*Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]*Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] *Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]*Delete as applicable and the Examiners Recommend: Please tick either:

a) that the candidate be granted the Professional Doctorate Award named above [Reg 6.8.3 a)]; or

b) that the candidate be granted the Professional Doctorate Award subject to amendments and corrections being made to the AIW to the satisfaction of the *Internal Examiner and/or External Examiner(s) within a period of ______ *days/weeks/months from written notification (subject to a maximum of 4 months). [Reg 6.8.3 b), 6.8.4]. (A list of the amendments must be submitted separately.)

and proceed to Q9, OR please tick:

52

Name of Candidate:

8. Conclusion – Award NOT Recommended (Please tick appropriate boxes and make additional comments).

The candidate has not satisfied the Examiners as a candidate for the degree of:*Doctor of Business Administration [DBA]*Doctor of Clinical Psychology [DClinPsy]*Doctor of Counselling Psychology [DCounPsy]*Doctor of Education [EdD]*Doctor of Health Psychology [DHealthPsy]*Doctor of Professional Practice [DrPP]*Doctor of Public Health [DrPH] *Doctor of Psychology [PsyD]*Delete as applicable in the following respects (a full report of the required revisions/deficiencies of the thesis must be submitted separately):

and the Examiners Recommend: (the Examiners are requested to tick the Recommendation(s) that apply(ies)),that the candidate be permitted to re-submit for the Professional Doctorate Award named above and be re-examined as follows [Reg 6.8.3 c)]:

and one of the following: (*please tick as appropriate)(i) *the AIW must be revised and if deemed satisfactory by the Examiners, the candidate will be

exempt from further examination, oral or otherwise; or

(ii) *the AIW must be revised and the candidate must undergo a further oral or alternative examination; or

(iii) *the AIW is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further oral or alternative examination; or

(iv) *the AIW is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further examination which shall take the form of:

(to be specified by the Examiners) or

9. Please add any matters of feedback that you would wish to be given to the candidate on their work. (This is in addition to any list of required amendments or revisions and also in the case of students whose awards are recommended without amendments, e.g. their work, advice on publication, performance in the oral examination, other matters of relevance to their research.) [Reg 6.8.7 refers]

10. Signed (Examiners)

Date:

53

Name of Candidate:

11. Comments of Independent Non-Examining Chair in relation to conduct of oral examination (if applicable)

Signed Independent Chair

Date:

12. The Recommendations were ratified by the Award/Progression Board:Name of Board: Date:

Or through Chair’s Action on:

54

APPENDIX C3

TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY

PROFDOCAIW03

Appendix C3 Preliminary Report and Provisional Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate's Resubmission of Advanced Independent Work for a Professional Doctorate

Award (Pre 2017/18 only)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the re-submission of the AIW and make a recommendation to the Award/Progression Board where a further oral examination is not required. Where a further oral examination is required, Form PROFDOCAIW04 must also be completed following that examination and submitted to the Award/Progression Board.Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately.

1. The Candidate:

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Title of AIW:

2 Name of Examiner(s):(*Please use (I) Internal (E) External as appropriate)

3 Report of the Examiner on the AIW submitted

Does the resubmitted AIW address satisfactorily matters relating to deficiencies identified in the first submission? If NO, please expand in “Section 4, Report”.

YES/NO

55

4 Report: To be used to comment on revised AIW and to supplement a “NO” answer to questions 3. A Report of about 300 words should suffice. Please continue overleaf or add additional sheet if necessary.

56

Name of Candidate:

5 Recommendation (Please tick) Note: If the Examiner wishes to suspend judgement until after the oral (or approved alternative)

examination this should be stated below (d). If the candidate's subsequent performance in the oral examination is such as to necessitate an amendment to the recommendation made on this form, the final recommendation should be stated on form PROFDOCAIW05.

a)The AIW has been resubmitted to my satisfaction and I recommend the Professional Doctorate Award detailed in Section 1 should be made without the need for further oral examination [Reg 6.9.6 a)].

Or b):The AIW requires amendments to be made to the satisfaction of the internal* and/or external* examiners within _______ (days/weeks/months*) with/without the requirement for a further oral examination. (The timeframe is at the discretion of the Examiners, subject to a maximum of 4 months. *Please delete as necessary. A list of the amendments should be appended.) [Reg 6.9.6b)]

Or c):The AIW resubmitted is not satisfactory. The student should not pass the AIW and not be permitted to be re-examined [Reg 6.9.6 d)].

Or d):I wish to reserve judgement on a recommendation pending the outcome of a further oral examination.

6 Examiner’s Signature (Please include a signed copy with the AIW if submitted electronically.)Signed: Date:

7 The Recommendations were ratified by the

……………………………………..Award/Progression Board on:

Or through Chair’s Action:

57

APPENDIX C4

TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY

PROFDOCAIW04

Appendix C4 Recommendation of an Examiner on a Candidate's Performance in a Repeat Oral (Viva Voce) Examination for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)

The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint report on this form on the repeat oral examination of the candidate where such an examination is required.Note: If an agreed report cannot be submitted, each examiner should report separately.

1. The Candidate:

Name in Full:

Name of School:

Name of Collaborating establishment, if any:

Professional Doctorate Award:

Title of AIW:

Date of repeat oral examination:Please indicate if this is a second repeat oral examination.

2 Name of Examiner(s):(*Please use (I) Internal (E) External as appropriate)

3 Report of the Examiner on the AIW submitted

Did the student give a satisfactory performance in the oral examination and address any deficiencies identified in the first oral examination? If NO, please expand in “Section 5, Report”.

YES/NO

4 Please state whether the candidate was absent from the oral examination at any time with/without the Examiners’ agreement, the nature and the length of the absence, and actions taken as a result of the absence. [Regulation 6.10 refers]

58

5 Report: To be used to comment on repeat oral examination and to supplement a “NO” answer to questions 3. A Report of about 300 words should suffice. Please continue overleaf or add additional sheet if necessary.

59

Name of Candidate:

6 Report of the Examiners where an alternative examination has been approved. [Reg 6.5.2 b),6.5.4 ]

Where an alternative form of examination has been approved by the University a report on the candidate's performance should be given below; the form of examination must be specified.

7 Recommendation (Please tick) Note: If the Examiner wishes to suspend judgement until after the oral examination, this should be stated

below (d). If the candidate's subsequent performance in the oral examination is such as to necessitate an amendment to the recommendation made on this form, the final recommendation should be stated on form PROFDOCAIW05.

a):The performance in the oral/alternative examination was satisfactory and the candidate may be awarded the Professional Doctorate award named in 1. above subject to any amendments that may be required to the AIW as indicated in Form PROFDOCAIW03 [Reg 6.9.6b)]

Or b):The performance in the oral/alternative examination was not satisfactory, but the AIW submitted was satisfactory then the student should be granted an exceptional third attempt at the oral examination.

Or c):The performance in the oral/alternative examination was not satisfactory. The student should not pass the Professional Doctorate award and not be permitted to be re-examined.

8 Examiner’s Signature(s) (Please include a signed copy with the AIW if submitted electronically.)Signed: Date:

7 The Recommendations were ratified by the

…………………………………………………Award/Progression Board on:

Or through Chair’s Action on:

60

Appendix C4PROFDOCAIW05

TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY

Appendix C4 Final Recommendations of Examiner(s) following Amendments to Advanced Independent Work for a Professional Doctorate Award (Pre 2017/18 only)

Candidate’s Name:

Award: DClinPsy/DCounPsy/DEd/PsyD/DBA/DProfPract School:

AIW Title:

Name of Examiner(s)

((I) Internal,

(E) External)

Tick either

I confirm that the above candidate’s AIW has been amended to my satisfaction.Or

The above candidate’s AIW has not been amended to my satisfaction in the following respects:

* Please delete that which does not apply.

Signed:

Name (Please print): Internal / External Examiner*

Date:

* Please delete that which does not apply.

The Examiner(s) Final Recommendations were ratified by the …………………………………………………Progression/Award Board held on:

Or through Chair’s Action:

61

Annex D: Teesside University Credit Level Descriptors

Learning activities at the respective level of study are designed to enable students to:

Personal and Transferable SkillsDomain Level 7 Level 8

Personal evaluation and development Use personal reflection to analyse self and own actions. Make connections

between known and unknown areas, to allow for adaptation and change. Independently and self critically develop own learning and reflect on own and others’ learning to improve practice.

Interpersonal and communication skills

Identify, evaluate and maintain capabilities and qualities to support effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts.

Select relevant communication tools to communicate complex or contentious information that is relevant to the target audience.

Team and organisational working Work effectively with multiple teams as leader or member. Lead or work effectively in multiple teams, with capacity to perform different

roles.

Clarify tasks and make appropriate use of the capacities of team members resolving likely conflict situations before they arise. Manage capacities of others and is confident in negotiating and managing

conflict.

Working in digital environments

Demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of a range of digital environments and the ability to operate responsibility within them.

Demonstrate sophisticated understanding of a range of digital environments and model responsible use of digital environments.

Decision making Use judgement to make evidence-based decisions within complex academic and/or professional contexts.

Operate as a decision maker in complex and unpredictable contexts and develop a strategic approach to delivering outcomes.

Accept full accountability for the outcome and impact of those decisions.

62

Research, Knowledge and Cognitive SkillsDomain Level 7 Level 8

Critical Thinking Use highly abstract ideas, to develop critical responses, to contemporary theoretical discourses and to articulate new approaches.

Work at the forefront of the discipline, to develop and articulate highly abstract ideas, to develop new knowledge and contribute to the theoretical discourse.

Research, enquiry and synthesis

Design substantial investigations to address significant areas of theory and/or practice.

.

Act independently and with originality in research to develop or adapt appropriate advanced methodological approaches.

Select appropriate advanced methodological approaches and critically evaluate their effectiveness

Analysis and Evaluation

Analyse complex, incomplete or contradictory evidence/data and justify the enquiry methodologies used and recognise and argue for alternative approaches.

Undertake independent critical analysis or evaluation, managing complexity, incompleteness of data or contradictions in areas of knowledge.

63

Professional Skills For programmes with PSRB accreditation and/or specific professional requirements - level descriptors and outcomes under this heading should primarily be focused on meeting PSRB requirements and QAA subject benchmarks. For example a key descriptor could be: meet the professional requirements/competencies that enable registration.

There may be other skills that are developed within a programme that need to be evidenced at an appropriate level, for example:Adaptation to context: adapt to a different variety of contexts with different levels of supervision/autonomy;

Performance: perform tasks, techniques or processes with different levels of complexity; take different levels of responsibility for analysing/evaluating the performance of self (and others) based on different ranges of data/evidence;

Ethical awareness and application: have different levels of awareness of professional ethical issues and professional codes of conduct have different levels of ability to manage ethical dilemmas and formulate solutions with others

For courses where there are no specific PSRB accreditation and/or specific professional requirements the following descriptors may be considered.

Domain Level 7 Level 8Adaptations to context Autonomously adapt own performance in complex and unpredictable

contexts. Autonomously adapt own performance to work effectively in multiple contexts.

PerformanceAutonomously implement and evaluate improvements to performance drawing on innovative or best practice.

Use initiative to perform with precision and effectiveness, taking responsibility for self and others to develop skills and procedures.

Ethical awareness and application Incorporate a critical ethical dimension to their practice managing the

implications of ethical dilemmas, working proactively with others to formulate solutions.

Analyses and manages ethical dilemmas, works proactively with others to formulate and implement solutions.

64