External Examiner Induction The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: Organisational Structure Paul Baxter Head of Quality Assurance 18 th May 2007 Email:

External Examiner Induction

The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: Organisational Structure

Paul BaxterHead of Quality Assurance

18th May 2007

Email: [email protected]

• 5 Faculties

• 29 Departments

• 50+ Programmes

• Numerous pathways and modules

Anglia Ruskin’s Organisational Structure


Faculty

Department A Department B

Programme A1

Programme A2

Pathways Pathways PathwaysPathwaysPathways

Programme B1

Programme B2

Programme A3


Faculty of Science & Technology

Built Environment Design & Technology

Surveying Programme

Construction Programme

Architecture & Planning

Programme

Design & Engineering Programme

Technology Programme

Pathways Pathways PathwaysPathwaysPathways


Business School

Department 1 Department 2 Department 3

UndergraduateProgramme

PostgraduateProgramme

ProfessionalProgramme

• Deans of Faculty• Associate Deans (with responsibility for quality

assurance)• Directors of Studies• Heads of Department• Programme Leaders• Pathway Leaders• Module Leaders

Key Postholders in the Faculties

Key Central Postholders

• Lesley Dobree, Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement) [[email protected]]

• Malcolm Morrison, Director of Academic and Quality Systems Office [[email protected]]

• Paul Baxter, Head of Quality Assurance [[email protected]]

• Chris Collins, Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) [[email protected]]

• Jo Duggan, Secretary [[email protected]]

• Faculty Quality Assurance Officers


The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: The Two-Tier Assessment Process


18th May 2007


• modules

• academic standards (including mean marks, standard deviation and comparison with performance from previous years/assessment periods)

• considering the performance of students enrolled on modules

• approving the marks achieved by students on modules; moderating where appropriate

• awarding credit for the achievement of students on modules

• determining the necessary action to retrieve failed modules

Tier One: Departmental Assessment Panels

• considering the overall performance of students registered on pathways

• receiving and confirming recommendations on claims of mitigating circumstances

• awarding credit to students on modules passed by compensation

• confirming eligibility for awards on the basis of accumulated credit in accordance with the Pathway Specification Form (PSF – Anglia Ruskin’s version of the Programme Specification)

• conferring awards

Tier Two: Faculty Awards Boards

Expectations of External Examiners

• regular attendance at, and participation in, assessment panel/board meetings and discussions

• academic standards• approve proposed assessment tasks prior to use (tier one:

DAP)• moderate assessed student work (tier one: DAP)• comparability: other UK HEIs and external reference points• fairness and due process• annual report(s)

ALL ON BEHALF OF THE ANGLIA RUSKIN SENATE

• provide advice and guidance to Module Leader / Module Team / Assessment Panel / Awards Board

• recommend changes where necessary

• support should not be unduly withheld

• the external examiner is a member of an Assessment Panel / Awards Board; has no extra powers

• all decision are Assessment Panel / Awards Board decisions

Powers & Limitations

An external examiner should not be:

• personally associated with the sponsorship of students

• required to assess colleagues who are students

• involved with Anglia Ruskin placements or training

Impartiality

• Head of Department / Dean of Faculty• Faculty Quality Assurance Officer• Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance)• Chris Collins, Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External

Examiners & TQI), Quality Assurance Division• Jo Duggan, Secretary, Quality Assurance Division• Paul Baxter, Head of Quality Assurance• Lesley Dobree, Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement)

• dedicated e-mail address for all queries: [email protected]

• dedicated webpage: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/qad/ext_ass/ext_examiners.phtml

Support we provide…


The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: Key Assessment Regulations


18th May 2007


Curriculum Details

• Assessment is prescribed in the Module Definition Form (MDF) and modules are in multiples of 15 credits (permitted variants are 15, 30, 45 and 60)

• This is the approved version and assessment can only be changed via modifications process (must include watermark)

• Module Guides are issued to students and provide detailed information, expanding on details provided in the MDF

• Assessment relates directly to module learning outcomes. Assessment volume is regulated according to new guidelines

• Module learning outcomes relate to pathway learning outcomes. Pathways are described on the Pathway Specification Form (PSF)

Curriculum Details (cont.)

• Modules of 30 or more credits may run over two semesters; each level must include one module of 30 or more credits

• Level one semester one modules will not be assessed by examinations

• New assessment criteria and marking standards describe 0, 1-29%, 30-39%, 40-49%, 50-59%, 60-69% and 70%+ (see Appendix to Senate Code of Practice on the Assessment of Students)

• Independent Learning modules

• Major project

• PDP / Progress files

The Qualifying Mark

• minimum level of achievement

• for each element of assessment in a module, as detailed on the MDF

• default value: 30%

• qualifying mark must be obtained in all elements of assessment in order for module to be passed (eg: Coursework mark of 60% and Examination mark of 26% = Overall module mark of 43% = FAIL)

• may be set at a higher level, usually for professional reasons, agreed at approval stage

• DAPs cannot waive this requirement

• the pass mark for the module at all levels is an aggregate of 40%

• students are entitled to one re-assessment attempt at a module if the first attempt is failed

• where a module is failed at the first attempt, students will be re-assessed in those elements of assessment where the mark is <40%

• where a module is failed at the first attempt, elements of assessment where the mark is 40%+ are not re-assessed

• the module mark after re-assessment is capped at 40% (NB: previously element marks were capped at 40%). Highest element marks achieved used to calculate module mark after re-assessment

• the Qualifying Mark must be achieved to pass at re-assessment

Module Assessment

Module Assessment

1) PassNo Re-assessment

2) FailRe-assessCW only

3) FailRe-assessCW2 and EX

1) n/a

2) CW markon re-sit:50%

3) Marks on re-sit:CW2: 50%EX: 28%

1) CW (50%) 35EX (50%) 50Total 43

2) CW (50%) 26EX (50%) 58Total 42

3) CW1 (30%) 44CW2 (30%) 28EX (40%) 38Total 37

1) n/a

2) Pass40%

3) Pass40%

1st Attempt

Student 1 CW 50%EX 34%Total 42%

Student 2 CW 34%EX 32%Total 33%

Why Cap Modules?

2nd Attempt

No re-assessmentFor this student

CW 50%EX 34%Total 42% (capped at 40%)

but if 50% CW mark is capped CW 40%EX 34%Total 37% - FAIL

Compensation

• based on the principle of preventing students with marginal failure, but who have performed strongly elsewhere, having to undertake further re-assessment.

• only applies at undergraduate level for awards which attract 120+ credits

• not permitted for Major Project modules

• applied at the earliest opportunity in the assessment process (eg: as soon as the student becomes eligible)

• specific modules and/or pathways can be exempted from compensation; agreed at approval stage

• no discretion; if all criteria are satisfied, compensation is applied

The following criteria must be satisfied:

• modules of total value of 75+ credits must be passed at the level under consideration (includes AP(E)L credit)

• the mean result of the fine graded modules within the 75+ requirement is 45% or higher

• the module mark of the module being considered for compensation is within the range 30-39%

• all qualifying marks, as stated on the MDF, have been achieved

Compensation (cont.)

Limits to volume and level of compensation:

• Honours Degree: maximum of 45 credits in total and 30 credits at any one level

• Ordinary Degree, Foundation Degree, Dip. HE: maximum of 30 credits in total and 30 credits at any one level

• HND, HNC, Cert. HE, PGCE (level 3): maximum of 15 credits

• Grad. Dip., Uni. Dip., Acc. Cert.: maximum of 15 credits

Compensation (cont.)

Compensation is formally determined and undertaken by the Awards Board and results in the award of credit and a “Pass (by compensation)” result. The module mark remains unchanged

The Awards Board can make one of the following decisions:

• transfer to an alternative pathway where the failed modules are not required and (some of) the modules already attained can contribute to the new pathway

• transfer to the Faculty Framework Award (where approved)

• confer highest available intermediate award

• enforced student withdrawal from the University

Options under Continuation Regulations

Transitional Regulations

Three categories of pathway

• Category A: “long life” 15/30 pathways, whose title continues in 2006-07 and thereafter

• Category B: “populated non-continuing” 15/30 pathways, whose title does not continue in 2006-07. Existing students to take 15/30 credit modules but to retain on graduation the award title for which they are currently registered

• Category C: “short life” 10/20 pathways, to continue with 10/20 credit curriculum for finite period, approved on individual basis by 15/30 Project Board


Assessment issues for new learning (all 3 categories)

• number of module attempts

• use of qualifying mark

• capping of failed modules

• compensation

• mitigation

• replacement designate modules after two failures in a module

• award classification


Cat A Cat B Cat C

“old learning” Curriculum 1. Curriculum 1. Curriculum 1.

(before Sept 2006) Regulations Regulations Regulations

“new learning” Academic Academic Curriculum 2.

(wef Sept 2006) Regulations Regulations Regulations

1. including former number of reassessment attempts2. but Academic Regulations for new procedures (mitigation,

student review, short/long term extensions, appeals, assessment offences)


The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: Approving Assessment Tasks and Moderating Assessed Work

Chris CollinsInstitutional Quality Assurance Officer

(External Examiners & TQI)18th May 2007


Items that require external examiner approval:• examination papers• other major items of assessment

External examiners need:• the relevant Module Definition Form (MDF)• the relevant Module Guide• the published marking scheme• indicative answers (where available)• sufficient time

ApprovingAssessment Tasks

Purpose: to comment on suitability of tasks with regard to level and academic standards and comparability with similar provision elsewhere

The external examiner is therefore looking for:

• evidence of appropriate academic standards

• clarity

• fairness

• coverage

Approving Assessment Tasks

Moderating Assessed Work

All assessment methods which contribute 25% or more to the overall assessment of a module are moderated

• sampling: minimum of 8 or 10%, whichever the greater; to cover range of performance and all locations of delivery

• presented with agreed marks for all candidates at all locations of delivery – not a second or third marker

• posting of work/attendance prior to meetings

• access to all work

• can propose, for individual assessment tasks, the moderation of all marks up, down or request complete re-marking

• cannot change individual marks

• External Examiner recommendation; Assessment Panel decision

Moderating Assessed Work


The External Examiner’s Annual Report

Chris CollinsInstitutional Quality Assurance Officer

(External Examiners & TQI)18th May 2007


• standard template for both Tier One (DAP) and Tier Two (FAB) incorporating former TQI requirements

• additional standard template for non-modular Assessment Boards (NMABs)

• one report should be provided for each duty (Tier One, Tier Two or NMAB), where appropriate

• templates circulated in late May in hard copy and available electronically from the dedicated webpage:

http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/qad/ext_ass/ext_examiners.phtml

• submitted from July onwards directly to the Quality Assurance Division (not faculties/departments)

e-mail: [email protected]

• deadline of end of September

The Annual Report

• circulated by the Quality Assurance Division to relevant faculty/departmental staff

• also read by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement), Director of Academic & Quality Systems Office, Head of Quality Assurance and Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI)

• individual students should not be identified• comments in Sections 7d of Tier 1 report and 4d of Tier 2 report

submitted to the Senate• included as part of the annual monitoring process• written response to be provided within two months of receipt

part of contract; no report = no fee!

The Annual Report

The Annual Report

• claim for fee and expenses made on form F15• separate fee should be claimed for each duty• F15 sent to the Quality Assurance Division ‘hard copy’

when the annual report is submitted• full completion of F15 facilitates prompt payment• guidance available from the Quality Assurance Division

regarding completion of annual reports and F15 formse-mail: [email protected]

Tel: 0845 196 4665 (Chris Collins) or 0845 196 4862 (Jo Duggan)

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

External Examiner Induction The External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin: Organisational Structure Paul Baxter Head of Quality Assurance 18 th May 2007 Email: