Senate Code of Practice
on
External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study (including distributed learning)
Approved by the Senate on 11 July 2006
5th edition (revised) July 2006 Foreword
This Senate Code of Practice is one of a series of Codes through which, in conjunction with other mechanisms, the University's academic standards and quality of education are maintained, assured and enhanced.
Each Code of Practice has been approved by the Senate for use throughout the University and its regional and international partner institutions.
The complete set of Codes, as at September 2006, covers (the date of initial Senate approval is shown in brackets):
External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study (15 January 2003)
The Approval, Annual Monitoring and Periodic Review of Taught Programmes of Study (18 June 2003)
Collaborative Provision: International (18 June 2003)
Assessment of Students (15 June 2005)
Postgraduate Research Programmes (12 October 2005)
The Codes are closely linked and share common elements of University quality assurance policy and practice. They should therefore be read as a set.
Further copies of this Code of Practice are available on request from the Academic and Quality Systems Office.
This Code of Practice is divided into two main sections: Part A: Policy (pages 3 - 20) and Part B: Procedure (pages 21 - 82). Part B describes the detailed implementation (in 2006/07) of the Policy detailed in Part A.
Part B is particularly intended for those staff within Anglia Ruskin and its regional and international partners who have a curriculum management responsibility which includes the identification, appointment, induction and ongoing contact with External Examiners. These staff include Deans of Faculties, Associate Deans (with responsibility for quality assurance) Heads of Department, Directors of Studies, Programme Leaders, Pathway Leaders, Module Leaders and senior management and administrative staff within Anglia Ruskin and its partner institutions.
An electronic copy of this Code of Practice is available at:
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/qad/sen_codes_practice/senate.phtml.
Malcolm Morrison Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office September 2006
1 2 PART A: POLICY
3 4 Part A Contents
Page
1. Introduction 7
2. Purpose of External Examining 7
3. Anglia Ruskin's Formal Requirements 7
4. Role of External Examiners at Anglia Ruskin University 9
4.1 for a Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) 9 4.2 for a Faculty Awards Board (FAB)1 11
5. Nomination 12
6. Appointment Criteria 12
7. Preparation of External Examiners 14
8. Annual Written Reports 15
8.6 External Examiner for a Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) 15 8.7 External Examiner for a Faculty Awards Board (FAB) 17
9. Receipt of, and Response to, External Examiners' Reports 17
10. Feedback to External Examiners on their Reports 18
Contents Page for Part B: Procedure 23
1 Throughout this Senate Code of Practice all references to a Faculty Awards Board should be taken to include a Professional Awards Board, where appropriate.
5 6 Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study (including distributed learning)
1. Introduction
1.1 This Code of Practice has been approved by the Senate and is based on the precepts contained in Section 4 (second edition, August 2004) of the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education. It complements other Senate Codes of Practice for specific quality assurance activities including:
The Approval, Annual Monitoring and Periodic Review of Taught Programmes of Study The Assessment of Students Collaborative Provision Postgraduate Research Programmes.
1.2 The Code of Practice applies equally to the University and its regional and international partner institutions. Certain processes relating to External Examiners have been delegated to the Norwich School of Art & Design (NSAD) under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and NSAD. Reference is made to these delegated areas of responsibility in the following paragraphs: 3.2, 3.8 4.1.8, 4.2.5, 4.3, 5.1, 6.1, 7.3, 8.2, 8.8, 9.3 and 10.5. The operational detail of these arrangements is set out in the Part B of this Code of Practice.
1.3 The Code also applies to External Examiners appointed by Anglia Ruskin to assess BTEC awards in accordance with Anglia Ruskin’s Licence Agreement with Edexcel under the Joint Appointment Protocol.
2. Purpose of External Examining
2.1 The purpose of the external examining system in UK higher education is to help institutions to ensure that:
“the academic standard for each award and its component parts is set and maintained by the awarding institution at the appropriate level, and that the standards of student performance are properly judged against this; the assessment process measures student achievement appropriately against the intended outcomes of the programme, and is rigorous, fairly operated and in line with the institution’s policies and regulations; institutions are able to compare the standards of their awards with those of other higher education institutions" (QAA, Code of Practice, Section 4, page 6 (August 2004)).
3. Anglia Ruskin’s Formal Requirements
3.1 External Examiners are responsible to the Senate as the body which authorises conferment of Anglia Ruskin’s awards and to the Vice-Chancellor as Chair of the Senate.
7 3.2 External Examiners are sent a formal letter of appointment by the Academic and Quality Systems Office. The appointment is not confirmed until the External Examiner returns a signed proforma, accepting the terms of the appointment. The appropriate Faculty or in certain cases the regional partner institution is responsible for continuing contact with the External Examiner [see paragraph 7.3 below for further details].
3.3 External Examiners are asked to report on whether the academic standards set by the University are at an appropriate level and to compare Anglia Ruskin’s standards with those of similar programmes at other UK higher education institutions. In making these evaluations External Examiners are expected to draw on appropriate external reference points, including those published by Professional or Statutory Bodies (PSBs) and the QAA.
3.4 External Examiners are appointed to each Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP), as required by the University’s Academic Regulations. The Head of Department is responsible for ensuring that sufficient numbers of External Examiners are nominated for appointment to the DAP to achieve adequate coverage of all modules for which the DAP is responsible. A minimum of one external examiner is appointed to each DAP.
3.5 External Examiners are appointed to each Faculty Awards Board (FAB), as required by the University's Academic Regulations. The Associate Dean of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) is responsible for ensuring that sufficient External Examiners are nominated for appointment to the FAB and that all meetings of the FAB are adequately covered in terms of External Examiner attendance. A minimum of one external examiner is appointed to each FAB.
3.6 No award of the University can be conferred without the attendance of at least one External Examiner at the meeting of the FAB at which the decision to recommend an award is made. The External Examiner is a full member of the relevant FAB.
3.7 In certain cases, e.g. to satisfy the requirements of a PSB, External Examiners may be appointed, under the auspices of the FAB, to oversee the student review process.
3.8 The functions of a DAP and a FAB may be combined into a single Assessment Board (or equivalent body) in certain regional partner institutions where responsibility for such matters has been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution.
3.9 The outcomes of all DAPs and FABs are formally endorsed by an External Examiner (appending his/her signature to the results documentation) before publication. An External Examiner who exceptionally does not wish to endorse the outcomes, either in general or for a particular student, gives his/her reasons in a separate written report to the Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office in accordance with Part A, paragraph 8.4 of this Code of Practice. Such cases are referred immediately to the Chair of the Senate (or nominee) for further investigation.
8 1. Role of External Examiners at Anglia Ruskin University
Departmental Assessment Panel
4.1 The role of an External Examiner appointed by Anglia Ruskin to a DAP is to:
4.1.1 attend a minimum of one meeting each year and have access to all assessed work, including assessed work related to meetings which he/she is unable to attend. All External Examiners appointed to a DAP are invited, and encouraged, to attend all meetings of the relevant DAP. Unforeseen circumstances may exceptionally prevent an External Examiner from attending a meeting. If such circumstances arise a sufficient time in advance of the meeting an alternative External Examiner is appointed to the DAP, if at all possible 4.1.2 judge academic standards impartially on the basis of work submitted for assessment without being influenced by previous association with the staff or any of the students
4.1.3 evaluate the performance and achievement of students in relation to their peers on comparable modules (or equivalent learning) at other UK higher education institutions
4.1.4 approve:
the content of the major item of assessment for a module (or the content of both or all items of assessment where two or more items have an equal weighting in the assessment of the module)
the content of all draft examination papers (whether or not they are the major item of assessment for a module).
All proposed assessments are accompanied by a copy of the relevant Module Definition Form (MDF), module guide and assessment criteria, to enable an External Examiner to assess their compatibility with the module aims and outcomes, and their comparability with the standard of assessment tasks set on similar programmes at other institutions. Proposed assessment tasks are sent to External Examiners at least four weeks prior to the date of intended use.
4.1.5 moderate samples of assessed work covering the full range of marks in order to ensure that appropriate standards of assessment are being maintained by Anglia Ruskin examiners. For all modules in each assessment period, the sample to be considered in advance of meetings of the appropriate DAP comprises a minimum of eight items or 10% (whichever is the greater) of the assessed work for each assessment element contributing 25% or more of the overall assessment for a module. Samples are moderated on this basis for those modules within a Department which contribute towards the classification of students’ individual awards. For most awards the modules concerned are at Level 2 or higher. For the Cert HE, HNC and HND, modules at Level 1 contribute towards the classification of the award. In such cases a sample of assessed work for modules at
9 level 1, undertaken by students registered for those awards, must be moderated by the appropriate External Examiner.
The sample for each assessment element covers the full range of marks, including failures and borderline cases (where such examples exist). The sample includes assessed work in partner institutions. Every location of delivery is represented within the sample. Assessed work selected for inclusion within the sample must include work which has been subject to internal moderation but may also include work which has not been internally moderated. The minimum sample size may need to be exceeded to ensure effective external moderation (i.e. satisfying the minimum number of items of assessed work does not necessarily mean that all the criteria for a sample have been met). All samples are accompanied by a full schedule of all marks achieved by all students enrolled on the relevant module(s) for all assessment methods and for all locations of delivery.
4.1.6 ensure that the assessments are conducted in accordance with the Academic Regulations
4.1.7 report annually on the effectiveness of the assessments and any lessons to be drawn from them, in accordance with policies determined by the Senate
4.1.8 report to the appropriate external body, through the Chair of the Senate of the University or Principal of a regional partner institution, on any matters of serious concern arising from the assessments which put academic standards at risk
4.1.9 ensure that, where applicable, student placements or professional practice are conducted and assessed in accordance with the approved regulations
4.1.10 endorse the outcomes of the assessment process by appending his/her signature to the results documentation.
In addition, an External Examiner for a DAP has the right to:
4.1.11 be informed of any proposed changes to the approved progression and assessment regulations which directly affect currently registered students.
4.1.12 advise, if exceptionally requested to do so by the Head of Department, in cases of internal disagreement which remains unresolved.
4.1.13 propose the adjustment of all marks awarded by Anglia Ruskin examiners for an element(s) within a module or the complete re- marking of all elements for a module taken by the same cohort of students but not to propose an adjustment to the marks of individual students for an element(s) within a module, unless all items of work for that element(s) completed by the same cohort of students have been considered by the External Examiner.
4.1.14 participate as required in any reviews of decisions about individual students taken during his/her period of office.
10 Faculty Awards Board
4.2 The role of an External Examiner appointed by Anglia Ruskin to a FAB is to:
4.2.1 attend a minimum of one meeting each year at which decisions on recommendations for awards are made, and ensure that those recommendations have been reached by means according with the requirements of the Senate of the University and normal practice in higher education. All External Examiners appointed to a FAB are invited, and encouraged, to attend all meetings of the relevant FAB. No award of the University can be conferred without the attendance of at least one External Examiner at the meeting of the FAB at which the decision to recommend an award is made (see paragraph 3.6 above). Unforeseen circumstances may exceptionally prevent an External Examiner from attending a meeting. If such circumstances arise a sufficient time in advance of the meeting an alternative External Examiner is appointed to the FAB, if at all possible
4.2.2 judge the fairness of the FAB’s decisions impartially without being influenced by previous associations with the awards, the staff, or any of the students
4.2.3 compare the regulations and procedures governing the determination of Anglia Ruskin awards with those of comparable awards in the UK
4.2.4 report annually on the effectiveness of the processes of the Awards Board
4.2.5 report, where appropriate, to a professional body through the Chair of the Senate of the University or Principal of a regional partner institution on any matters of serious concern arising from the assessments which put at risk the academic standard of an award
4.2.6 endorse the outcomes of the assessment process by appending his/her signature to the results documentation.
In addition, an External Examiner for a FAB has the right to:
4.2.7 be consulted on any proposed changes to the approved progression and assessment regulations which directly affect currently registered students
4.2.8 participate as required in any reviews of decisions about students' individual awards taken during his/her period of office.
4.3 The roles of the External Examiner for a DAP and a FAB may be combined in certain regional partner institutions where responsibility for such matters has been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution.
11 5. Nomination
5.1The appointment of all External Examiners is formally approved by the Pro-Vice- Chancellor (Quality and Enhancement), acting on behalf of the Senate, on the recommendation of the relevant Faculty Board (including recommendations from those regional partner institutions where certain functions have been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution).
5.2The period of appointment covers a maximum of four academic years (normally four years and four months e.g. 1 September 2006 - December 2010) to facilitate the effective transfer of responsibilities between the incoming and outgoing External Examiner(s), including those relating to the reassessment of students. In exceptional circumstances an External Examiner's appointment may be extended for an additional academic year.
5.3The period of appointment for an External Examiner appointed by Anglia Ruskin to assess a BTEC award(s) is up to a maximum of four years (which may be extended to five years in exceptional circumstances). Such appointments are contracted by Edexcel on an annual basis.
6. Appointment Criteria
6.1 In recommending appointments Faculties (or regional partner institutions) take particular note of the following criteria:
6.1.1 External Examiners should possess an appropriate level of academic and/or professional expertise and experience in relation to the subject area to be assessed. This is likely to be reflected in their academic and/or professional qualifications and their current or recent engagement in research, scholarly or professional activity. In addition, in cases where the curriculum (or an element of it) is delivered in a language other than English the External Examiner should normally be proficient in the language concerned
6.1.2 External Examiners should have current or recent experience of external examining in higher education or comparable experience (e.g. as an internal examiner or member of a professional committee) which demonstrates their competence to examine students in the proposed subject area at the appropriate level. In cases where a nominee does not possess such experience the Dean of the Faculty is required to provide details of specific training to be provided by the Faculty during the initial stage of appointment
6.1.3 the External Examiner should be prepared to work within the context of a credit-based, modular system including a two-tiered assessment process
12 6.1.4 in order to provide sufficient time for the effective performance of their duties External Examiners should not normally hold concurrently more than two substantial external examinerships for taught programmes of study (including their Anglia Ruskin appointment(s)). In seeking approval for any exception to this principle the Faculty (or regional partner institution) is required to provide an assurance from the nominee that there would be no adverse effect on the nominee's proposed Anglia Ruskin duties
6.1.5 former members of staff may not be appointed as External Examiners before a period of five years has lapsed or there has been sufficient time for any students taught by that staff member to have graduated, whichever is the longer
6.1.6 nominees who have retired (or retire during their period of appointment) should indicate how they have maintained (or will maintain) their expertise and familiarity with current practice in their subject
6.1.7 no more than one External Examiner from the same institution is appointed to the same DAP or FAB (or agreed combination of these) at Anglia Ruskin University. From time to time changes to the University's academic organisation and curriculum management structures, and the consequential re-alignment of External Examiner duties to reflect such changes, may result in a number of External Examiners from the same institution holding appointments on the same DAP and/or FAB for a short period. In such cases, the overlapping membership is addressed when replacement External Examiners are appointed
6.1.8 an External Examiner is not appointed from a department or unit in an institution where an Anglia Ruskin staff member in the subject concerned is also serving as an External Examiner (the avoidance of such reciprocity applies equally to Anglia Ruskin and its partner institutions)
6.1.9 a period of three years lapses before an External Examiner is replaced by another member from the same institution in the same subject area. An exception to this principle may be made where a specialist subject is taught in only a very small number of higher education institutions, for which a special case should be made on an individual basis
6.1.10 External Examiners who have completed their period of appointment may not be re-appointed as an External Examiner to the same or a related subject area at Anglia Ruskin until five years have lapsed
6.1.11 persons from outside higher education (e.g. from business, industry or the professions) may be appointed as External Examiners. However in such cases the DAP and/or FAB shall have at least one External Examiner from higher education who is able to compare Anglia Ruskin's academic standards with those of other higher education institutions
13 6.1.12 an External Examiner has not had, within the five years prior to appointment, any formal links with staff, students or taught academic programmes at Anglia Ruskin University or its partner institutions, unless exceptional circumstances apply. In such cases the links should be declared at the nomination stage.
6.2 It should be noted that the Senate has the authority to terminate the appointment of an External Examiner for negligence or misconduct, including failure to submit a suitable written annual report by the due date (see paras 8.1 and 8.5 of this Code of Practice).
7. Preparation of External Examiners
7.1 External Examiners are sent a briefing pack with their formal letter of appointment which includes:
information about the University the University’s Academic Regulations the Senate Codes of Practice on the Assessment of Students and External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study.
Any subsequent revisions to the Academic Regulations and or Senate Codes of Practice are highlighted annually by the Academic and Quality Systems Office to External Examiners throughout their period of office.
7.2 All newly appointed Anglia Ruskin External Examiners are invited to an institutional External Examiner Induction Programme, organised by the Academic and Quality Systems Office. The Induction Programme is delivered in May and November of each calendar year and includes an introduction to the University, its organisational and curriculum management structures, the two- tiered assessment process, details of the University’s expectations of its External Examiners and information on the Academic Regulations. The Programme also includes an opportunity to meet with key Faculty staff.
7.3 The appropriate Faculty (or in certain cases the regional partner institution) is responsible for continuing contact with the External Examiner, including any further briefing about the curriculum for the subject area and/or programme of study to which he/she has been appointed and the associated assessment processes and procedures. Material to be provided by the Faculty (or in certain cases the regional partner institution) includes:
Student Handbooks Module Definition Forms (MDFs) for the modules to be moderated* Student Module Guides for the modules to be moderated*
* applies only to External Examiners for DAPs
14 8. Annual Written Reports
8.1 External Examiners are required to submit by 30 September (31 August for those External Examiners who have additional responsibilities to Edexcel for BTEC awards) a written annual report for each Anglia Ruskin duty for which they have been appointed, following a prescribed template, to the Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office (or a designated alternate) who is responsible for ensuring that they are formally considered by the Dean and teaching staff of the appropriate Faculty. External Examiners are encouraged to submit an electronic copy of their report in addition to the paper copy.
8.2 External Examiners submit their reports directly to a regional partner institution in those cases where certain functions have been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution.
8.3 The payment of annual fees and expenses is conditional on receipt of the written annual report.
8.4 An External Examiner may, in addition, send a separate confidential report to the Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office if he/she exceptionally considers it to be appropriate.
8.5 If an External Examiner’s written annual report has not been received by 31 October, the Academic and Quality Systems Office formally writes to the External Examiner, drawing attention to this matter and advising him/her that, if the report is not received by 30 November (i.e. within a further month), his/her appointment will be terminated with immediate effect by the University in accordance with paragraph 6.2 of this Code of Practice.
8.6 Annual written reports for a DAP cover the following topics:
Academic standards [NB External Examiners base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated]
8.6.1 whether the aims and intended learning outcomes for individual modules have been clearly defined, made explicit to students in a published document, and been achieved by students who have successfully completed them
8.6.2 whether the academic standards set are appropriate for the level of the modules under consideration by the DAP
[NB External Examiners should draw on appropriate external reference points, including those published by PSBs and subject benchmark statements published by the QAA, when evaluating whether the academic standards set are appropriate for the level of modules under consideration]
8.6.3 student performance and achievement in relation to their peers on comparable modules (or equivalent learning) at other UK higher education institutions.
15 The curriculum [NB External Examiners should base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated]
8.6.4 the continuing currency and validity of the curriculum in the light of developing knowledge in the subject and practice in its application
8.6.5 curriculum design, content and organisation
8.6.6 curriculum delivery and the quality of teaching and learning methods as reflected in student performance.
Assessment [NB External Examiners should base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated]
8.6.7 the profile of student marks across the modules sampled
8.6.8 marking criteria
8.6.9 the assessment methods used and their contribution to student achievement of module aims and intended learning outcomes
8.6.10 the nature, extent and usefulness of the written feedback to students on their assessed work (assignments, lab work/practicals, artefacts etc).
Assessment procedures
8.6.11 sensitivity and fairness in relation to student performance on modules
8.6.12 the conduct of DAPs, including consistency in decision making and the accuracy of papers and marksheets for meetings
8.6.13 administrative arrangements for the provision of information/material to External Examiners.
Professional practice or placement
8.6.14 student performance and achievement of intended learning outcomes on any modules embracing professional practice or placement
8.6.15 the organisation and delivery of such activities within the curriculum.
General issues of interest or concern relating to curriculum structure, content, delivery or assessment
8.6.16 any examples of good practice in teaching, learning and assessment which could usefully be disseminated within Anglia Ruskin University
16 [The University defines good practice as a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which has, over an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (e.g. students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners, employers.) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in other areas of the institution. Such good practice can be evidenced in a variety of ways. Examples include student performance, statistical information, feedback from stakeholders (e.g. via questionnaires, Programme Committee meetings, Employer Liaison Panel meetings etc.).
8.6.17 any commendable achievements and/or outcomes that should be highlighted to a wider audience
8.6.18 any weaknesses which should be addressed by the teaching team and/or Faculty
8.6.19 any aspects where the University’s academic standards may be at risk (any issues highlighted in this category are formally reported to the Senate and require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty).
8.7 Annual written reports for a FAB cover the following topics:
Assessment procedures
8.7.1 sensitivity and fairness in relation to students’ awards
8.7.2 the conduct of the FAB, including consistency in decision making and the accuracy of papers and marksheets for meetings
8.7.3 administrative arrangements for the provision of information/material to External Examiners.
Determination of awards
8.7.4 the regulations and procedures governing the determination of those awards under consideration by the FAB and their comparability with those of similar awards at other UK higher education institutions.
General issues of interest or concern relating to assessment procedures and the determination of awards including the overall assessment scheme
8.7.5 any examples of good practice which could usefully be disseminated within Anglia Ruskin University (see paragraph 8.6.16 above for Anglia Ruskin’s definition of good practice)
8.7.6 any commendable achievements and/or outcomes that should be highlighted to a wider audience
8.7.7 any weaknesses which should be addressed by the teaching team and/or Faculty
17 8.7.8 any aspects where the University’s academic standards may be at risk (any issues highlighted in this category are formally reported to the Senate and require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty).
8.8 The annual written reports submitted by External Examiners for certain regional partner institutions cover all the topics identified in paragraphs 8.6 and 8.7 in cases where the functions of a DAP and a FAB have been combined into a single Assessment Board (or equivalent body) as described in paragraph 3.8 above.
9. Receipt of, and Response to, External Examiners’ Reports
9.1 The Academic and Quality Systems Office formally acknowledges the University’s receipt of an External Examiner’s report and sends a copy to the Dean of Faculty, Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance), Head of Department, Director of Studies and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer, as appropriate.
9.2 The report is formally considered by the Dean of the Faculty and relevant teaching staff and appropriate action is taken by the Faculty in response to any particular issues raised in the report.
9.3 Separate arrangements for acknowledging receipt of the report and for its subsequent dissemination apply in those regional partner institutions where certain functions have been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution.
9.4 The report and any action taken in response are also considered in the annual monitoring process undertaken under the auspices of the Senate (or a designated committee acting on behalf of the Senate).
10. Feedback to External Examiners on their Reports
10.1 Meetings of the DAP are used to provide an immediate opportunity for discussion with the appropriate External Examiner(s) of any issues or recommendations arising from the recent delivery and assessment of modules within the Department and for action to be taken in response, where appropriate.
10.2 In addition the Head of Department (for External Examiners appointed to DAPs) or Director of Studies (for External Examiners appointed to FABs) is responsible on behalf of the Dean of the Faculty for advising the External Examiner by a formal written letter, of action taken, where appropriate, in response to any issues or recommendations identified in his/her written report. This is done within two months of the University’s receipt of the report. An e-mail is not acceptable as a formal response to an External Examiner’s annual report. Where a particular issue requires further discussion by the Senate or another University-wide body, the External Examiner is informed of this action and receives a further update when available.
18 10.3 The Head of Department/Director of Studies ensures that the appropriate Pro Vice Chancellor, Dean of Faculty, Associate Dean of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer receive a copy of the written response to the External Examiner’s report.
10.4 In February/March of each year all External Examiners receive, for information, from the Head of Department/Director of Studies a copy of the relevant annual monitoring report(s) which contain(s) details of planned actions in response to all External Examiners’ reports submitted to the Department and other relevant information about the continued development of modules and pathways for the Programme(s) for which the Department is responsible.
10.5 Separate arrangements for advising External Examiners of action taken in response to their report apply in those regional partner colleges where certain functions have been delegated to the institution under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and the institution.
19 20 PART B: PROCEDURE
21 22 Part B Contents
1. Introduction 25
2. Appointment procedures 25
2.1 Nomination 25 2.2 Extension of Range of Duties/Modification of Duties 25 2.3 Number of External Examiners 26
3. Period of Appointment 26
3.1 External Examiners 26 3.2 Edexcel External Examiners 26 3.3 External Verifiers 27
4. Nomination and Approval Process 27
4.1 Annual timetable 27 4.2 Responsibilities of Anglia Ruskin Faculties 27 4.3 Responsibilities of the Academic and Quality Systems Office 29 4.4 On-Going Communication with External Examiners 29 4.5 NSAD and HSHS 29
5. Preparation of External Examiners 30
5.1 The Anglia Ruskin Briefing Pack 30 5.2 The Anglia Ruskin Institutional External Examiner Induction 30 Programme 5.3 Local Briefing and Induction Programme: Guidelines to Anglia 31 Ruskin Faculties and NSAD/HSHS
6. Annual Report 33
7. Fees 33
------
Appendix 1 External Examiner nomination form: EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University 35 Appendix 2 External Examiner nomination form: EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS 43
Appendix 3 External Examiner extension/modification of duties form: 51 EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
Appendix 4 External Examiner extension/modification of duties form: EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS 57
Appendix 5 Flowchart for the appointment of a new External Examiner 2006/07 63
Appendix 6 Guidance on External Examiner fees and submission of claims 65
Appendix 7 External Examiner’s Annual Report Template: Tier 1 – Departmental Assessment Panel 67
Appendix 8 External Examiner’s Annual Report Template: Tier 2 – Faculty Awards Board 77
23 24 2. Introduction
The Senate is formally responsible for approving the appointment of External Examiners for all modules and pathways leading to an Anglia Ruskin award, including those pathways delivered by regional and international partner institutions. The appointment of each External Examiner is formally approved by the Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality and Enhancement) acting on behalf of the Senate and on the initial recommendation of the appropriate Faculty Board.
Part B of this Code of Practice, which should be read in conjunction with Part A, describes in detail the University’s procedures for the nomination, approval, appointment and preparation of External Examiners. It is designed to ensure consistency of practice across the University and its regional and international partner institutions.
Responsibility for certain quality assurance processes, including aspects of the appointment of External Examiners, is delegated to the Norwich School of Art & Design (NSAD) under the Academic Agreement between Anglia Ruskin and NSAD. The operational detail of these arrangements is set out in Part B and is supplemented by local guidance available from NSAD.
Pending the full convergence of HSHS2 with Anglia Ruskin structures, for the academic year 2006/07 only, HSHS continues to exercise delegated responsibility for aspects of the appointment of External Examiners and the operational detail of these arrangements is described in Part B of this Code of Practice.
3. Appointment Procedures
2.1 Nomination
The following forms are used for the appointment of External Examiners:
EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University for External Examiners overseeing delivery by Anglia Ruskin Faculties and/or franchised delivery by regional or international partner institutions EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS for External Examiners overseeing delivery by NSAD and HSHS
2.2 Extension of Range of Duties/Modification of Duties
The following forms are used for the extension of the range of duties, or the modification of duties, undertaken by existing External Examiners:
EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University for External Examiners overseeing delivery by Anglia Ruskin Faculties and/or franchised delivery by regional or international partner institutions EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS for External Examiners overseeing delivery by NSAD and HSHS
2 HSHS: the former Homerton School of Health Studies
25 The forms listed in 2.1 and 2.2 above [see Appendices 1-4] are available in either paper or electronic format from the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners and TQI), Chris Collins (tel: 0845 196 4665, email: [email protected])
2.3 Number of External Examiners
In accordance with Anglia Ruskin’s Academic Regulations, External Examiners are appointed to membership of Departmental Assessment Panels (DAPs) and Faculty Awards Boards (FABs). The Head of Department (for a DAP) and the Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) (for a FAB) have responsibility for determining the appropriate number of External Examiners required.
External Examiners overseeing delivery at NSAD and HSHS are appointed for specific pathways. They therefore fall outside the remit of Anglia Ruskin’s DAP and FAB structures.
4. Period of Appointment
3.1 External Examiners
The normal period of appointment for an External Examiner is four years and four months (e.g. 1 September 2006 - 31 December 2010), thereby securing an overlap of knowledge and expertise between the incoming and departing External Examiner and facilitating the effective transfer of responsibilities (including those relating to the reassessment of students). The overlap period also provides the opportunity for the Faculty to arrange an appropriate local induction programme for an incoming External Examiner.
Approval may be sought to extend an External Examiner’s period of appointment for an additional year using the following forms available from the Academic and Quality Systems Office [see Appendices 3 and 4]:
EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University for External Examiners overseeing delivery by Anglia Ruskin Faculties and/or franchised delivery by regional or international partner institutions EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS for External Examiners overseeing delivery by NSAD and HSHS.
3.2 Edexcel External Examiners
A Joint Appointment Protocol has been incorporated in Anglia Ruskin’s Licence Agreement with Edexcel. The Protocol provides for joint appointment and reporting procedures to be used in cases where an External Examiner is appointed by Anglia Ruskin to assess BTEC awards. Forms EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University and EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS include a one-page appendix for completion by External Examiners who fall into this category.
26 3.3 External Verifiers
As required by the awarding body (i.e. Edexcel, City and Guilds, MVC, RSA), External Verifiers are appointed by Anglia Ruskin to monitor the delivery and assessment of NVQ qualifications offered by the University. Such appointments (which are for up to 52 months) are also formally approved by the Senate using form EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University.
5. Nomination and Approval Process
4.1 Annual timetable
There is a timetable commencing annually in January for the nomination and approval of External Examiners details of which are contained in a flowchart [see Appendix 5 to this Procedural Document]. The key staff involved in coordinating and implementing the appointment process are the Associate Dean of the Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance), the Head of Department, the Faculty Quality Assurance Officer3., the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners and TQI)., the Head of Quality Assurance and the Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality and Enhancement).
4.2 Responsibilities of Anglia Ruskin Faculties
The Head of Department (for DAP External Examiners) and the Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) (for FAB External Examiners) is responsible for identifying and nominating an External Examiner approximately nine months in advance of the proposed start date.
Once identified, the proposed External Examiner is asked by the Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) to complete:
either EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University for new External Examiners or EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University for existing External Examiners whose period of appointment or area of responsibility is being extended or whose duties are being modified.
The Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) is responsible for ensuring that the nomination form is completed correctly. CVs are not accepted as a substitute for completing the form. However, extracts from a CV may be attached to the form to supplement information already contained in the form.
3 Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences: Richard Monk ([email protected]) Ashcroft International Business School: Claire Moorey ([email protected]) Faculty of Education: Julia Coll ([email protected]) Institute of Health & Social Care: Sara Elliott ([email protected]) Faculty of Science & Technology: Ellen Langford-Clarke ([email protected])
27 At an early stage in the nomination process the Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) identifies whether the proposed External Examiner is familiar with, and prepared to work within, the context of a credit-based modular system, including a two-tiered assessment process. If the proposed External Examiner is unclear about the implications of such a system, the Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) briefs the nominee accordingly.
The Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) also identifies the nature of a local induction programme required by the proposed External Examiner if they have no previous external examining experience in higher education (or other comparable experience). In such circumstances the local induction programme, agreed in consultation with the proposed External Examiner, should be formally approved by the Dean of the Faculty in view of the likely resource implications. Details of the local induction programme should be included in the space provided under question 25(b) of the nomination form.
Once the form has been signed by the proposed External Examiner and the Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) (as appropriate), it is submitted to the Faculty Quality Assurance Officer for consideration by the Faculty Board.
The Faculty Quality Assurance Officer undertakes an analysis of the nomination against the appointment criteria set out in the Senate Code of Practice (para. 6.1) and provides the outcome of the analysis, together with the full nomination, to the Faculty Board for consideration.
Exceptionally, the schedule and timing of Faculty Board meetings may not allow nominations to be considered by a full meeting of the Faculty Board without delaying the progress of the nomination. Such delay prevents the appointment of the external examiner before the proposed start of his/her term of office (eg: a replacement for an external examiner who has resigned or is unable to continue his/her duties due to illness or other valid cause). In such cases, the nomination is considered formally by the Dean of Faculty, on behalf of the Faculty Board, following advice from the Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer who undertakes the same analysis as required for a full meeting of the Faculty Board.
If the Faculty Board (or the Dean of Faculty on behalf of the Faculty Board) approves the nomination, the Faculty Quality Assurance Officer forwards it, together with a copy of the relevant unconfirmed minute of the Faculty Board meeting (or a signed proforma from the Dean of Faculty, confirming that Chair’s Action has been taken on behalf of the Faculty Board), to the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) for consideration by the Pro Vice Chancellor, on behalf of the Senate.
If the Faculty Board (or the Dean of Faculty on behalf of the Faculty Board) does not approve the nomination, it can either be considered again at a future meeting when any issues raised by the Faculty Board have been addressed or a new nomination is required.
28 4.3 Responsibilities of the Academic and Quality Systems Office
On receipt of the Faculty Board approved nomination, the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) considers the nomination against the appointment criteria set out in the Senate Code of Practice (para. 6.1). It may be necessary, in certain cases, for the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) to discuss the nomination with the Head of Department, Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) and/or Faculty Quality Assurance Officer for clarification.
The Institutional Quality Assurance Officer forwards the complete nomination, together with his/her analysis of the nomination to the Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement) for consideration on behalf of the Senate.
If the proposed External Examiner is approved by the Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement), a formal offer of appointment and Anglia Ruskin Briefing Pack is sent on behalf of the University from the Head of Quality Assurance.
4.4 On-Going Communication with External Examiners
In 2006/07, new Academic Regulations have been introduced for all taught modular programmes. The Head of Quality Assurance will write, in September 2006, to all external examiners with information about the new regulations and the transitional arrangements.
Any subsequent revisions to Anglia Ruskin’s Academic Regulations and/or Senate Codes of Practice are communicated to External Examiners throughout their period of appointment by the Academic and Quality Systems Office.
The Faculty is responsible for all continuing contact with the External Examiner, including any further briefing about the curriculum and the associated assessment processes and procedures.
The Academic and Quality Systems Office is responsible for formally communicating with the External Examiner at the beginning and end of their period of appointment and for acknowledging Anglia Ruskin’s receipt of their annual written report. However, there may be occasions, during his/her period of office, when other formal communication is made to external examiners via the Academic and Quality Systems Office. In addition, external examiners are always able to contact the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) for advice and guidance via the dedicated e-mail account set up exclusively for External Examiners ([email protected]).
4.5 NSAD and HSHS
Under the terms of the Academic Agreement with Anglia Ruskin, NSAD is responsible for identifying and nominating to the relevant Faculty Board via the Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer a new or replacement External Examiner at least nine months before the period of appointment of an existing External Examiner is due to expire or a new programme of study is planned to start. For the academic year 2006/07 only, HSHS is also responsible for the identification and nomination of new and replacement external examiners (see section 1 above).
29 Once identified, the proposed External Examiner is asked by NSAD or HSHS to complete:
either EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS for new External Examiners or EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS for existing External Examiners whose period of appointment or area of responsibility is being extended or whose duties are being modified
NSAD/HSHS is responsible for ensuring that the nomination form is completed correctly. CVs are not accepted as a substitute for completing the form. However, extracts from a CV may be attached to the form to supplement information already contained in the form.
NSAD/HSHS also identifies the nature of the induction programme required by the proposed External Examiner if they have no previous external examining experience in higher education (or other comparable experience). Details of the induction programme, which should be agreed in consultation with the nominee, should be included in the space provided under question 22(b) of the nomination form.
Once the form has been signed by the proposed External Examiner and the appropriate NSAD/HSHS officer, it is submitted to the Faculty Quality Assurance Officer for consideration in the normal way, as outlined in para 4.2 above.
If the proposed External Examiner is approved by the Pro Vice Chancellor the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners and TQI) advises NSAD/HSHS of the outcome. NSAD/HSHS is responsible for sending a formal offer of appointment to the External Examiner, enclosing a Briefing Pack.
6. Preparation of External Examiners
5.1 The Anglia Ruskin Briefing Pack
All External Examiners receive an Anglia Ruskin Briefing Pack with their formal offer of appointment from the Academic and Quality Systems Office (or from NSAD/HSHS where responsibility for certain quality assurance processes has been delegated; see para 4.3 above). For External Examiners overseeing delivery by Anglia Ruskin Faculties and/or franchised delivery by regional or international partner institutions the Briefing Pack includes:
information about Anglia Ruskin and the University’s Modular Scheme Anglia Ruskin’s Academic Regulations and, for certain transitional arrangements in 2006/07, the Curriculum Regulations the Senate Codes of Practice on (i) External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study and (ii) the Assessment of Students
5.2 The Anglia Ruskin Institutional External Examiner Induction Programme
All newly appointed External Examiners are invited to an institutional External Examiner Induction Programme, organised by the Academic & Quality Systems Office in May and November of each year. The dates for the 2006/07 academic year are: 14 November 2006 (Essex Campus) and 18 May 2007 (Cambridge Campus).
30 A formal invitation is sent by the Academic and Quality Systems Office to all newly appointed External Examiners when the formal offer of appointment is made. The Head of Quality Assurance, Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) and the Head of Modular Programmes deliver a number of sessions which cover the following areas:
introduction to the University with brief details of its mission and student profile details of the University’s academic, organisational and curriculum management structures, including a definition of terms the two-tiered assessment process the role of the External Examiner at Anglia Ruskin briefing on key extracts from the Academic Regulations details of Anglia Ruskin quality assurance processes, particularly with regard to the assessment process information on the External Examiner’s Annual Report: due date, standard format, content and process for internal consideration and response expenses claims.
Faculties re-imburse any reasonable travel and other subsistence expenses for attendance at the Institutional Induction Programme. No fee is paid to the External Examiner for attendance.
5.3 Local Briefing and Induction Programme: Guidelines to Anglia Ruskin Faculties and NSAD/HSHS
The Anglia Ruskin Briefing Pack and Institutional Induction Programme are supplemented at Faculty/NSAD/HSHS level by local briefing and, where appropriate, a local induction programme.
It is the responsibility of the Head of Department/Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance)/Pathway Leader to:
identify the nature of the local induction programme required by the proposed External Examiner if they have no previous external examining experience in higher education (or other comparable experience). Any local induction programme is formulated in line with the appointment criteria set out in para 6.1 of the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study and complements the information provided in the Institutional Induction Programme. It also provides more specific information about Faculty/NSAD/HSHS operations after detailed discussion with the proposed External Examiner, obtain approval for the local induction programme from the Dean of the Faculty/NSAD/HSHS officer in view of the likely resource implications monitor the effectiveness of the local induction programme, identifying any additional support or guidance from the Faculty/NSAD/HSHS which may be required by the External Examiner.
The local briefing and induction programme should be tailored to the specific and identified needs of an incoming External Examiner and should provide an opportunity to:
31 describe the structure, content and organisation of the curriculum which the External Examiner will be serving provide further information on Anglia Ruskin’s quality assurance policies and procedures.
The local briefing and induction programme should be coordinated and conducted by the Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) and may involve the Dean of the Faculty and appropriate colleagues.
The following topics should routinely be covered in the local briefing and induction programme provided by an Anglia Ruskin Faculty or NSAD/HSHS for a new External Examiner:
relevant documentation e.g. Handbooks for Students, Pathway Specification Forms, a list of modules within the Department (or NSAD/HSHS equivalent), module definition forms/module guides (including assessment methods and assessment criteria) the local implementation of quality assurance policies and procedures: internal and external moderation processes (e.g. double marking and external moderation, size and range of sampling process), feedback to students on assessed work, student evaluation mechanisms and processes for reporting action in response, annual monitoring, the articulation of Anglia Ruskin and NSAD/HSHS procedures (if the External Examiner is appointed to NSAD/HSHS) the local consideration of the External Examiner’s Annual Report: due date, standard format, content and process for internal consideration and response. Any enhancement of standard processes that the Faculty/NSAD/HSHS operates should be explained; local administrative processes: timetable for preparing examination question papers, dates of meetings, Faculty/NSAD/HSHS contact person.
External Examiners are invited in their annual written report to comment on the induction process and to identify good practice and/or areas for improvement.
The Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement), on behalf of the Senate, reserves the right to specify a particular induction programme and/or level of support and guidance from a Faculty/NSAD/HSHS in cases where it is considered necessary. Approval of a proposed External Examiner may be conditional upon such provision.
Where appropriate a Faculty/NSAD/HSHS may also wish to provide an incoming External Examiner with the opportunity to:
communicate with the departing External Examiner by telephone or e-mail, if not in person attend a DAP or FAB (or NSAD/HSHS equivalent) as an observer.
Before an External Examiner attends a local induction programme the Faculty/NSAD/HSHS should make clear that it is able to pay only travel and subsistence expenses for the visit.
32 7. Annual Report
All External Examiners are required to submit an annual written report by 30 September (by 31 August for those External Examiners with additional responsibilities to Edexcel for BTEC awards). The reports are submitted to the Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office (or a designated alternative) or direct to NSAD/HSHS (where responsibility for certain quality assurance processes has been delegated).
Since there are differences in the role and responsibilities of External Examiners for DAPs and FABs, separate report proformas for the written reports are used [see Appendices 7 and 8]. To satisfy the requirements of HEFCE’s final guidance on “Information on quality and standards in HE” (HEFCE 03/51, October 2003) summaries of Anglia Ruskin’s External Examiners’ reports are published on a national Teaching Quality Information (TQI) website. The annual report proformas contain a section to satisfy these requirements.
On receipt of the report, the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) sends a copy to the Dean of Faculty, Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) and Head of Department (for DAPs) and Director of Studies (for FABs). The report is copied to the Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement), Director of Academic and Quality Systems Office, Head of Quality Assurance and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer.
In addition, the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners & TQI) prepares an analysis of the main issues raised by all reports for the attention of the Pro Vice Chancellor.
Question 6 of the External Examiner report template invites External Examiners to highlight any weaknesses or areas of concern where academic standards may be at risk for reporting to the Senate in Semester 1 of each academic year. The relevant Faculty is required to provide the Senate with a full response to each issue, where necessary. Question 6 also invites External Examiners to identify examples of good practice and any commendable achievements.
Section C of the External Examiner report template asks External Examiners to comment on the level of service received from Anglia Ruskin. An analysis of these responses is provided each year in the Annual Quality Assurance Report to the Senate.
8. Fees
Faculties (or NSAD/HSHS) are responsible for paying External Examiners’ fees and travel and subsistence expenses [see Appendix 6 for Anglia Ruskin’s Guidance on External Examiner fees and the submission of Expenses Claims].
33 External Examiners are required to submit to the Academic and Quality Systems Office an annual claim for their fee using an F15 Form (enclosed with their offer of appointment). The Institutional Quality Assurance Officer (External Examiners and TQI) within the Academic and Quality Systems Office is responsible for checking whether the External Examiner has submitted an annual written report and, if so, for forwarding the claim form to the relevant Faculty for authorisation of payment of the fee by the Faculty (see para 8.3 of the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study).
A minimum annual fee of £350 per duty is paid to external examiners. Faculties have the discretion to set a higher level of the annual fee per duty for External Examiners at the nomination stage (a duty is defined as an appointment to one DAP or FAB. An External Examiner who is appointed to both a DAP and a FAB is therefore performing two duties. He/she will be required to complete two annual reports, one for each duty, and will receive a separate fee for each duty; eg: 2 x £350).
External Examiners also submit to the Academic and Quality Systems Office claims for travel expenses and other interim payments. The claim is recorded by the Academic and Quality Systems Office before it is forwarded to the relevant Faculty for payment.
34 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
Senate
EXTERNAL EXAMINER NOMINATION FORM (for new appointments)
Please complete this form carefully in BLOCK CAPITALS using BLACK INK or complete an electronic version (available on request from the Academic & Quality Systems Office).
Please complete all parts in full. If you have no information to put in one section write “none”. Please do not attach CVs.
Please note that, in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, the information contained on this form may be held on computer files for administration purposes only.
SECTION A - DETAILS OF APPOINTMENT
To be completed by the Head of Department (for 2a) and/or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) (for 2b), before being sent to the proposed External Examiner.
1. Name of Proposed External Examiner
2. Type of External Examiner
Tier 1 a) Departmental Assessment Panel – please name and/or Tier 2 b) Faculty Awards Board - please name and specify if Student Review Function is intended.
c) Is this External Examiner also being proposed to undertake EDEXCEL responsibilities under the Anglia Ruskin/ Edexcel Joint Appointment Protocol? (Yes/No) If yes, the proposed External should note question 24 and complete Appendix 1
3. Name of Head of Department (for 2a) or Associate Dean (QA) (for 2b) - please name
4. Responsible Faculty and campus - please name
5. Proposed Period of Appointment normally 52 months from 1 September - 31 December
6. Name of External Examiner being replaced state ‘additional appointment’ if there is no predecessor in the relevant role.
35 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
7. Details of any duties specific to the proposed External Examiner (e.g. Outcentre/franchise/international /professionally accredited pathways/BTEC)
8. Details of existing External Examiners (if any) appointed to the same Department Assessment Panel or Faculty Awards Board (or Student Review function of the Faculty Awards Board if appropriate)
Name(s) Institution Departmental Any specific Period of Appointment Assessment duties eg Panel /Awards BTEC or Board professional body
9. Proposed Fee delete as appropriate; the minimum fee payable is £350 per duty but it £350.00 Higher Amount is possible for a higher amount to agreed by the Faculty. If this is the case, please state £ the relevant figure.
Please now send this form to the proposed External Examiner for completion
36 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
SECTION B - PERSONAL DETAILS
To be completed by the proposed External Examiner
10. Surname and title
11. Forename(s)
12. Gender delete as appropriate Male Female
13. Date of Birth information required in order to facilitate fee payment
14. Address for correspondence
15. E-mail address
16. Daytime telephone number
17. Higher education (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
University/College Qualification - title and subject From - To
18. Other professional qualifications including membership of professional bodies (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
Institution/professional body Qualification Date obtained
37 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
19. Publications, consultancy, research or related activities (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
Please list any books or refereed publications, research consultancy or other equivalent recent experience
20. Present or most recent employment
Employer's name and address Your position Period of appointment
21. Current and/or previous external examining experience (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
University/College Awards and subject areas examined From - To
If you have no external examining experience, please give examples of other relevant experience (e.g. internal examiner, course leader, Chair of your own University’s/ College’s Assessment Board, other quality assurance activities, membership of a professional committee, etc) with dates (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
38 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
22. Any current/previous association with Anglia Ruskin University - Please indicate any other links with Anglia Ruskin (or its predecessor institutions) with dates
Nature of the link From -To
23. Familiarity with and willingness to work within a modular system
a) Do you have any experience of teaching or assessing within a modular system? Please give details.
b) Are you willing to work within the remit of Anglia Ruskin’s modular and two-tiered assessment process? (If you are unclear about the full implications of this, please seek further information and guidance from the Head of Department or Director of Studies before answering this question and completing this form.)
Yes/No (delete as applicable)
24. EDEXCEL
If the answer to question 2c on p. 1 above is ‘Yes’, please complete Appendix 1.
39 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
SECTION C
25. AUTHORISATION
Data Protection Act 1998
I consent to the University processing the above data and any such other data as it shall obtain from me for legitimate purposes associated with my appointment or possible appointment as an External Examiner.
To be signed by the nominated External Examiner
…………………………………………………….. Date: ………………………………. Signature of nominated External Examiner
Please now return this form to the Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) – see Box 3, page 1 for relevant name and Box 4, page 1 for relevant faculty and campus - at:
Anglia Ruskin University OR Anglia Ruskin University Bishop Hall Lane East Road Chelmsford Cambridge Essex CB1 1BT CM1 1SQ
The Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) should then pass this on to the Dean of Faculty to consider the following:
If the proposed External Examiner does not demonstrate external examining or other comparable experience under Q21 above, the Dean of Faculty should indicate here (or on an attached sheet) in what ways the Faculty will induct and support the new External.
The Dean of Faculty should check that there is no reciprocal examining arrangement involved with this nomination (reciprocal external examining in the same subject area between Anglia Ruskin University and another institution is not permitted under University regulations). This should be formally confirmed on the checklist for the Faculty Board Approval.
Signature: …………………………………………………… Date: ………………………………
Please now send this original form to the relevant Faculty Quality Assurance Officer who will submit it to the Faculty Board for consideration and approval.
40 Appendix 1 – EE/Nom/1/Anglia Ruskin University
APPENDIX 1
FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINERS WHO ARE ALSO BEING PROPOSED AS EDEXCEL EXTERNAL EXAMINERS UNDER THE JOINT APPOINTMENT PROTOCOL
If your appointment is also to cover BTEC responsibilities, please fill in this page as EDEXCEL BTEC requires certain information for their quality control procedures and records.
1. Surname and title
2. Forename(s)
3. Home address
4. Home telephone number
5. Work address
6. Work telephone number
7. Date of birth
8. Are you currently registered as an Edexcel External Examiner? YES/NO
9. EE Reference Number (if known)
10. Details of TWO referees
41 42 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY Senate
EXTERNAL EXAMINER NOMINATION FORM (for new appointments at Norwich School of Art and Design and HSHS)
Please complete this form carefully in BLOCK CAPITALS using BLACK INK or complete an electronic version (available on request from the Academic & Quality Systems Office, Anglia Ruskin University).
Please complete all parts in full. If you have no information to put in one section write “none”. Please do not attach CVs.
Please note that, in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, the information contained on this form may be held on computer files for administration purposes only.
SECTION A - DETAILS OF APPOINTMENT
To be completed by the Norwich School of Art & Design (NSAD) or HSHS before being sent to the proposed External Examiner.
1. Name of proposed External Examiner
2. Name of relevant academic contact at NSAD/HSHS delete as applicable
3. Name of pathway(s), course scheme(s), programme(s) of study which the External Examiner is to cover
4. Is this appointment also to cover Edexcel duties under the Accord? delete as applicable Yes No If yes, the proposed External should complete Edexcel form MOD/5 (attached here as Appendix 1)
5. Proposed Period of Appointment - normally 52 months from 1 September - 31 December
6. Name of External Examiner being replaced state ‘additional appointment’ if there is no predecessor in the relevant role
7. Details of any duties specific to the proposed External Examiner
43 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
8. Details of existing External Examiners (if any) appointed to the same pathway, scheme or programme of study
Name(s) Institution Course, scheme Any specific Period of Appointment or programme of duties eg BTEC study or professional body
Please now send this form to the proposed External Examiner for completion
44 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
SECTION B - PERSONAL DETAILS
To be completed by the proposed External Examiner
9. Surname and title
10. Forename(s)
11. Gender delete as applicable Male Female
12. Address for correspondence
13. E-mail address
14. Daytime telephone number
15. Higher education (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
University/College Qualification - title and subject From - To
16. Other professional qualifications including membership of professional bodies (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
Institution/professional body Qualification Date obtained
45 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
17. Publications, consultancy, research or related activities (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
Please list any books or refereed publications, research consultancy or other equivalent recent experience
18. Present or most recent employment
Employer's name and address Your position Period of appointment
19. Current and/or previous external examining experience (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
University/College Awards and subject areas examined From - To
46 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
If you have no external examining experience, please give examples of other relevant experience (eg internal examiner, course leader, Chair of your own University’s/College’s Assessment Board, other quality assurance activities, membership of a professional committee etc) with dates (or attach these details on a separate sheet)
20. Any current/previous association with NSAD/HSHS/Anglia Ruskin University - please indicate any links with NSAD/HSHS/Anglia Ruskin with dates
Nature of the link From -To
21. Edexcel
If the answer to question 4 above is ‘Yes’ please complete Appendix 1.
47 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
SECTION C
22. AUTHORISATION
Data Protection Act 1998
I consent to the University processing the above data and any such other data as it shall obtain from me for legitimate purposes associated with my appointment or possible appointment as an External Examiner.
To be signed by the nominated External Examiner
………………………………………………………………….. Date …………………………………….. Signature of nominated External Examiner
Please now return this form to your academic contact at NSAD/HSHS (see box 2, page 1)
The academic contact at the NSAD/HSHS should then pass this on to the relevant Head of academic department to consider the following
If the proposed External Examiner does not demonstrate external examining or other comparable experience under Q19 above, the Head of academic department should indicate here (or on an attached sheet) in what ways the department will induct and support the new External.
To be signed by the Head of academic department
Signature ………………………………………………………… Date………………………………
Name ………………………………………………… Designation ……………………......
The Head of academic department should then pass this on to the Chair of the Departmental Board/Academic Standards Committee/Academic Board
48 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
To be signed by Chair to Departmental Board/Academic Standards Committee/ Academic Board
This nomination has been approved by NSAD/HSHS (please delete as appropriate). The nominee is suitably qualified and experienced for the duties s/he is expected to undertake. S/he has no previous formal contact with NSAD/HSHS/Anglia Ruskin University and does not have an excessive number of current external examining appointments which would prevent him/her from carrying out these duties effectively. This form has been fully completed and contains all the relevant information, on which NSAD/HSHS (please delete as appropriate) approval is based.
Signature ………………………………………………… Date ………………………………….
Name ………………………………………………. Designation ………………………………...
Please now send this original form to the relevant Anglia Ruskin Faculty Quality Assurance Officer who will submit it to the Faculty Board for consideration and approval.
49 Appendix 2 – EE/Nom/2/NSAD/HSHS
APPENDIX 1
FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINERS WHO ARE ALSO BEING PROPOSED AS EDEXCEL EXTERNAL EXAMINERS UNDER THE JOINT APPOINTMENT PROTOCOL
If your appointment is also to cover BTEC responsibilities, please fill in this page as EDEXCEL BTEC requires certain information for their quality control procedures and records.
1. Surname and title
Forename(s)
2. Home address
3. Home telephone number
4. Work address
5. Work telephone number
6. Date of birth
7. Are you currently registered as an YES/NO Edexcel External Examiner?
EE Reference Number (if known)
8. Details of TWO referees
50 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY Senate EXTERNAL EXAMINER EXTENSION/MODIFICATION FORM
(for extension of: (1) period of appointment and/or (2) range of duties; or (3) for modification of duties)
Please complete this form carefully in BLOCK CAPITALS using BLACK INK or complete an electronic version (available on request from the Academic & Quality Systems Office, Anglia Ruskin University).
Please complete all parts in full. If you have no information to put in one section write “none”. Please do not attach CVs.
Please note that, in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, the information contained on this form may be held on computer files for administration purposes only.
SECTION A - DETAILS OF PROPOSED EXTENSION/MODIFICATION
To be completed by the Head of Department (for 4.1a) and/or Associate Dean (with responsibility for Quality Assurance) (for 4.1b).
1. Name of External Examiner
2. Name of Head of Department (for 4.1a) or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) (for 4.1b)_
3. Responsible Faculty and campus
4. Extension of/modification to Panel/Board duties
4.1 Current Duties
a) Department Assessment Panel – please name
and/or
b) Faculty Awards Board – please name and specify if Student Review function
4.2 Additional Duties
a) Departmental Assessment Panel proposed - please name
and/or
b) Faculty Awards Board proposed - please name and specify if Student Review function
51 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
Or
4.3 Modified Duties
Details of proposed revised duties, ie. appointment to different Panel/Board (if applicable) – please name
4.4 EDEXCEL BTEC
Is this External Examiner also being proposed to undertake EDEXCEL Yes No responsibilities under the Anglia Ruskin/EDEXCEL BTEC Joint Appointment Protocol? delete as applicable [If yes, the proposed External should note question 14 and complete Appendix 1]
4.5 Details of any duties specific to the External Examiner e.g. (Outcentre/franchise/ international/BTEC)
5. Extension of Period of Appointment
5.1 Original period of appointment (from - to):
5.2 Extension requested (from - to):
52 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
6. Rationale for Extension/Modification to be completed by the Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) as appropriate (see box 2, page 1)
Please explain why you need to ask the External Examiner to undertake additional duties/modify duties and/or why you need to extend the External Examiner’s period of appointment. Please note that an External Examiner's normal period of appointment is four years and four months. An extension of one year is only allowed if there is a demonstrably good reason for so doing.
7. Confirm Fee Payable delete as appropriate; the minimum fee payable is £350.00 Higher Amount £350 per duty but it is possible for a higher amount to agreed by the Faculty. If £ this is the case, please state the relevant figure.
Yes No For modified duties only, please state if an additional fee is payable delete as applicable. If yes, please state the £ relevant figure
53 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
SECTION B - EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S PERSONAL DETAILS
To be completed by the relevant Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality Assurance) – see box 2 on page 1. (Please update from form EE/Nom1 on which the original nomination was made.)
8. Surname and title
9. Forename(s)
10. Gender delete as applicable Female Male
11. Address for correspondence
12. E-mail Address
13. Daytime telephone number
14. EDEXCEL
If the answer to question 4.4 above is ‘Yes’, please complete Appendix 1.
PLEASE NOW SEND THIS FORM, COMPLETED THUS FAR, TO THE EXTERNAL EXAMINER, WHO NEEDS TO AGREE TO THE EXTENSION
54 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
SECTION C
15. AUTHORISATION
Data Protection Act 1998
I consent to the University processing the above data and any such other data as it shall obtain from me for legitimate purposes associated with my appointment or possible appointment as an External Examiner.
To be signed by the nominated External Examiner
…………………………………………………….. Date: ………………………………. Signature of nominated External Examiner
Please now return this form to the Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) – see Box 3, page 1 for relevant name and Box 4, page 1 for relevant faculty and campus - at:
Anglia Ruskin University OR Anglia Ruskin University Bishop Hall Lane East Road Chelmsford Cambridge Essex CB1 1BT CM1 1SQ
The Head of Department or Associate Dean (with responsibility for quality assurance) should then pass this on to the Dean of for signature
Signature ……………………………………………………………………….. Date ………………………………….. Dean of Faculty
Please now send this original form to the relevant Faculty Quality Assurance Officer who will submit it to the Faculty Board for consideration and approval.
55 Appendix 3 – EE/Extn/1/Anglia Ruskin University
APPENDIX 1
FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINERS WHO ARE ALSO BEING PROPOSED AS EDEXCEL EXTERNAL EXAMINERS UNDER THE JOINT APPOINTMENT PROTOCOL
If your appointment is also to cover BTEC responsibilities, please fill in this page as EDEXCEL BTEC requires certain information for their quality control procedures and records.
1. Surname and title
Forename(s)
2. Home address
3. Home telephone number
4. Work address
5. Work telephone number
6. Date of birth
7. Are you currently registered as an Edexcel External Examiner? YES/NO
EE Reference Number (if known)
8. Details of TWO referees
56 Appendix 4 – EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY Senate
EXTERNAL EXAMINER EXTENSION/MODIFICATION FORM
(for extension of: (1) period of appointment and/or (2) range of duties; or (3) for modification of duties at Norwich School of Art & Design or HSHS)
Please complete this form carefully in BLOCK CAPITALS using BLACK INK or complete an electronic version (available on request from Norwich School of Art & Design or the Academic & Quality Systems Office, Anglia Ruskin University).
Please complete all parts in full. If you have no information to put in one section write “none”. Please do not attach CVs.
Please note that, in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, the information contained on this form may be held on computer files for administration purposes only.
SECTION A
EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S DUTIES
To be completed by Norwich School of Art & Design (NSAD) or HSHS
1. Name of External Examiner
2. Name of relevant academic contact at NSAD/HSHS delete as applicable
3. Extension/Modification of External Examiner’s duties
3.1 Current Duties
Name of course(s), course scheme(s), programme(s) of study which the External Examiner currently covers
3.2 Additional Duties
Details of proposed additional course(s), course scheme(s), programme(s) of study (if applicable)
Or
3.3 Modified Duties
Details of proposed revised duties, ie, different course(s), course scheme(s), programme(s) of study (if applicable)
57 Appendix 4 – EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS
3.4 EDEXCEL BTEC
Is this External Examiner also being proposed to undertake EDEXCEL Yes No responsibilities under the Accord? Delete as applicable [If yes, the proposed External should note question 13 and complete Appendix 1]
3.5 Details of any duties specific to the External Examiner
4. Extension of Period of Appointment
4.1 Original period of appointment (from - to)
4.2 Extension requested (from - to) if applicable
5. Rationale
To be completed by NSAD/HSHS (delete as appropriate).
Please explain why you need to ask the External Examiner to undertake additional duties/revised duties and/or why you need to extend the External Examiner’s period of appointment. Please note that an External Examiner's normal period of appointment is four years and four months. An extension of one year is only allowed if there is a demonstrably good reason for so doing.
58 Appendix 4 – EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS
SECTION B - EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S PERSONAL DETAILS
To be completed by NSAD/HSHS. (Please update from form EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS on which the original nomination was made.)
6. Surname and title
7. Forename(s)
8. Gender delete as applicable Female Male
9. Address for correspondence
10. E-mail Address
11. Daytime telephone number
12. Edexcel
If the answer to question 3.4 is ‘Yes’ please complete Appendix 1.
PLEASE NOW SEND THIS FORM, COMPLETED THUS FAR, TO THE EXTERNAL EXAMINER, WHO NEEDS TO AGREE TO THE EXTENSION
59 Appendix 4 – EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS
SECTION C
13. AUTHORISATION
Data Protection Act 1998
I consent to the University processing the above data and any such other data as it shall obtain from me for legitimate purposes associated with my appointment or possible appointment as an External Examiner.
To be signed by the nominated External Examiner
…………………………………………………….. Date: ………………………………. Signature of nominated External Examiner
Please now return this form to your academic contact at NSAD/HSHS.
The academic contact should then pass this on to the relevant Head of academic department
To be signed by the Head of academic department
Signature …………………………………………… Date ………………………………......
Name ………………………………………………… Designation……………………………………..
The Head of academic department should then pass this on to the Chair of the Departmental Board/Academic Standards Committee/Academic Board
To be signed by Chair of Departmental Board/Academic Standards Committee/ Academic Board
This extension has been approved by NSAD/HSHS. This form has been fully completed and contains all the relevant information, on which approval is based.
Signature …………………………………………… Date ………………………………......
Name ………………………………………………… Designation……………………………………..
Please now send this original form to the relevant Anglia Ruskin University Faculty Quality Assurance Officer, who will submit it to the Faculty Board for consideration and approval.
60 Appendix 4 – EE/Extn/2/NSAD/HSHS
APPENDIX 1
FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINERS WHO ARE ALSO BEING PROPOSED AS EDEXCEL EXTERNAL EXAMINERS UNDER THE JOINT APPOINTMENT PROTOCOL
If your appointment is also to cover BTEC responsibilities, please fill in this page as EDEXCEL BTEC requires certain information for their quality control procedures and records.
1. Surname and title
Forename(s)
2. Home address
3. Home telephone number
4. Work address
5. Work telephone number
6. Date of birth
7. Are you currently registered as an Edexcel External Examiner? YES/NO
EE Reference Number (if known)
8. Details of TWO referees
61 62 Appendix 5 – Flowchart
Flowchart for the appointment of a new external examiner in 2006/07
DATE (assuming contract START HERE expires on 31 December) January The IQAO sends HoDs, AD(QA) & FQAO list of external examiners whose contracts are due to expire within next 12 months
January The AD (QA) & FQAO oversee Faculty process for nominating each replacement via the appropriate HoD. – July
The HoD submits the nomination to the FQAO for initial checking against the SCoP criteria in consultation with the AD (QA)
Does the nomination satisfy SCoP criteria? No
Yes
April/May The nomination is formally considered by the Faculty Board Nomination is returned by FQAO to HoD Is the nomination approved by Faculty Board? No for further information or nomination of an alternate Yes
FQAO submits the nomination (& Faculty Board Minute) to IQAO for By June final checking against SCoP criteria
Does the nomination satisfy SCoP criteria? No
Yes
June The IQAO submits nomination (& cover sheet) to the PVC (Q&E) for final approval on behalf of the Senate
If approved by the PVC (Q&E), external examiner receives formal June offer of appointment from the Head of Quality Assurance (copied to Dean of Faculty, AD (QA), HoD & FQAO)
July/August The IQAO advises the Dean of Faculty , AD (QA), HoD & FQAO of external examiner’s response
Septembe New external examiner takes up appointment from 1 September r Key to acrony ms
IQAO: Institutional Quality Assurance Of f icer (External Examiners & TQI) – Chris Collins ([email protected]) AD (QA): Associate Dean of Faculty with responsibility got quality assurance FQAO: Faculty Quality Assurance Of f icer HoD: Head of Department SCoP: Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners f or Taught Programmes of Study PVC (Q&E): Pro Vice Chancellor (Quality & Enhancement)
63 64 Appendix 6 – Fee and Expenses Guidance
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC AND QUALITY SYSTEMS OFFICE
Quality Assurance Division
Guidance on External Examiner Fees and the Submission of Expenses Claims
An annual fee is paid to External Examiners on production of an annual written report, which is due in by 30 September each year (joint Anglia Ruskin/Edexcel Annual Reports are due in by 31 August each year in order that the Edexcel Lead Examiner for Anglia Ruskin can compile a summary report). External Examiners will be paid in accordance with the following University guidelines:
1. Fees
Basic Annual Fee, per duty - £350
This includes attendance at a minimum of one DAP or FAB meeting per year and the submission of an annual report.
2. Additional Fees
Additional payments are made for other duties, at the discretion of the Dean of Faculty, such as faculty or other professional experience visits, on the following basis:
Whole day - £75 Half day - £50
3. Professional Bodies
If the External Examiner is appointed on behalf of a professional body, Anglia Ruskin will pay the External Examiner for this work also on the same basis as paragraph 1 above.
4. Expenses
In addition to an annual fee, Anglia Ruskin will reimburse reasonable expenses on the following basis:-
(i) Second Class rail fares or mileage at the rate of 25p per mile.
(ii) Subsistence en route.
(iii) If necessary, and given prior notice, appropriate overnight hotel accommodation will be arranged by the relevant Faculty administrative staff in advance of the External Examiner’s visit, and the hotel will be asked to invoice the University direct.
(iv) However, the University will not be responsible for incidental personal expenses (e.g. newspapers and telephone calls). Any such expenses should be settled by the External Examiner prior to leaving the hotel.
(v) Claims for expenses may be submitted as soon as they are incurred (i.e. after attendance at a formal meeting or additional visit).
65 Appendix 6 – Fee and Expenses Guidance
5. Submission of claims
Claims for fees and expenses should be made on form F15 (enclosed). Further F15 forms can be obtained from your academic contact at Anglia Ruskin or from the Academic and Quality Systems Office. This form should be completed in full and submitted with the External Examiner’s annual report to the Director of the Academic and Quality Systems Office.
When completing form F15:
(i) please ensure that you note the month for which you are claiming;
(ii) please complete the personal details in Section A, including your national insurance number and date of birth, and the box that indicates if you have other employment. Please also remember to sign the form. These details are required by the Finance Department to pay you. You should not attach your P45 and you will not need to indicate an Anglia Ruskin Payroll Reference Number on your first claim form. Please note, however, that you will be allocated a Payroll Reference Number upon your first payment and should enter this number on any subsequent claim forms. Delays in payment may occur if the payroll number has not been entered.
Please attach your bank details each time you claim on an F15 as fees are paid direct into your bank account;
(iii) if you are self employed, or do not pay tax or national insurance for any reason, please contact Anglia Ruskin’s Finance Department (tel: 0845 271 3333), as soon as possible before making your claim. There are special procedures which apply to any such claims;
(iv) in Section B, please complete the name of the Departmental Assessment Panel/Faculty Awards Board with which you are associated, the site at which the Panel/Board meets, the date on which you attended the Panel/Board meeting and the fee which you are entitled to claim;
(v) in Section C, record any expenses/subsistence which you wish to claim;
(vi) in Section D, please tick the External Examiner box and the HE box;
(vii) Section E is completed by the relevant campus or Faculty Administrator responsible for dealing with External Examiner claims;
(viii) please retain the bottom copy of the claim form for your reference.
The Academic and Quality Systems Office acknowledges receipt of External Examiners’ reports and claims for fees and expenses. The claims will then be forwarded to the relevant budget holder for coding to the appropriate budget before being submitted to the University’s Human Resources Department for payment as soon as possible.
66 Appendix 7 – Tier 1 (DAP) Report Template
External Examiner’s Annual Report 2006/07 Tier 1 – Departmental Assessment Panel
SECTION A - Cover Sheet
Please forward your annual report to the Director, Academic & Quality Systems Office, together with your claim form (F15) for fees and expenses. Annual fees will only be paid on production of an annual report. Please note that a separate report must be produced for each separate duty to which you are appointed (please see letter of appointment for more details).
The Academic & Quality Systems Office will acknowledge receipt of your report which will be forwarded to relevant colleagues in the University.
THIS REPORT WILL BE COPIED AND CIRCULATED WIDELY THROUGHOUT THE UNIVERSITY. THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL IF THIS FORM IS COMPLETED IN TYPESCRIPT.
External Examiner:
Departmental Assessment Panel:
Date(s) of Departmental Assessment Panel meeting(s) attended:
Please indicate if you are also acting (in respect of this Panel) for other awarding or professional bodies involved in this award:
If you are acting for Edexcel, please detail the programme titles and Edexcel numbers:
Signature of External Examiner:
Date:
The Director, Academic & Quality Systems Office, Anglia Ruskin University, Bishop Hall Road, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 1SQ. Electronic versions can be sent to: [email protected] [Please note that all annual reports must be submitted to the University by 30th September 2007 (31st August 2007 for examiners with Edexcel responsibilities)]
67 67 SECTION B – Data for External Publication
External Examiner’s home institution or professional/ institutional affiliation:
Departmental Assessment Panel:
In accordance with HEFCE’s Guidance on Information on Quality and Standards in Higher Education (HEFCE 03/51, October 2003) please complete the following sections: Yes No in the view of the External Examiner, the standards set for the awards are appropriate for qualifications at this level, in this subject. If no, please provide a statement of the respects in which they fall short
Yes No in the view of the External Examiner, the standards of student performance are comparable with similar programmes or subjects in other UK institutions with which they are familiar. If no, please provide a statement of the respects in which they fall short
Yes No in the view of the External Examiner, the processes for assessment and examination are sound and fairly conducted [NB: The Awards Board External Examiner has been asked separately to comment on the processes for the determination of awards]. If no, please provide a statement of the respects in which they fall short
where appropriate, please provide a description or bullet point list of any particular strengths or distinctive or innovative features in relation to standards and assessment processes that would be worth drawing to the attention of external audiences.
68 SECTION C – Comments on Service Provided by Anglia Ruskin
External Examiner:
Departmental Assessment Panel:
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study did you receive: a briefing pack with your formal letter of appointment containing: Yes No information about Anglia Ruskin University and the University’s Modular Scheme Anglia Ruskin University’s Academic Regulations the Senate Codes of Practice on (i) External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study and (ii) the Assessment of Students? further briefing from the Department/Faculty about the curriculum for the subject area to which you have been appointed and the associated assessment process and procedures?
For the following questions please indicate your judgement using the following categories: A = agree strongly B = agree C = unable to judge D = disagree E = disagree strongly A B C D E The Department/Faculty teaching team established effective communication with me throughout the year. I was sent in sufficient time all draft major assessment tasks and/or examination papers (with assessment criteria) for approval. I was given the opportunity to see samples of marked work (including written assignments and examination scripts) covering the full range of marks in order to assure that appropriate standards of assessment were being maintained by the assessors. I saw evidence of internal moderation in the assessment process and it was used effectively and consistently.
Yes No Did you receive written feedback on your previous report [NB does not apply to the first year of appointment]? Were you satisfied with the response to the issues you raised in your previous report?
69 SECTION D – Main Report
YOUR MAIN REPORT SHOULD COVER THE FOLLOWING TOPICS (as stated in the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners)
1. Academic Standards (NB External Examiners should base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated) a) whether the aims and intended learning outcomes for individual modules have been clearly defined, made explicit to students in a published document, and been achieved by students who have successfully completed them
b) whether the academic standards set are appropriate for the level of the modules under consideration by the Department Assessment Panel (NB when evaluating whether academic standards are appropriate for the level of modules under consideration, External Examiners should draw on appropriate external reference points, including those published by Professional or Statutory Bodies and subject benchmark statements published by the Quality Assurance Agency)
c) student performance and achievement in relation to their peers on comparable modules at other UK higher education institutions
70 2. The curriculum (NB External Examiners should base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated) a) the continuing currency and validity of the curriculum in the light of developing knowledge in the subject and practice in its application
b) curriculum design, content and organisation
c) curriculum delivery and the quality of teaching and learning methods as reflected in student performance
71 3. Assessment (NB External Examiners should base their judgements on those modules whose assessment outcomes they have moderated) a) the profile of student marks across the modules sampled
b) marking criteria
c) the assessment methods used and their contribution to student achievement of module aims and intended learning outcomes
d) the nature, extent and usefulness of the written feedback to students on their assessed work (assignments, lab work/practicals, artefacts etc)
72 4. Assessment procedures a) sensitivity and fairness in relation to student performance on modules
b) the conduct of the Department Assessment Panel, including consistency in decision making and the accuracy of papers and marksheets for meetings
c) administrative arrangements for the provision of information/material to External Examiners
5. Professional practice or placement a) student performance and achievement of intended learning outcomes on any modules embracing professional practice or placement
b) the organisation and delivery of such activities within the curriculum
73 6. Special Additional Question for Academic Year 2006/07: Project 15/30 Implementation
During the 2005/06 academic year, the University revised its entire taught modular curriculum for delivery from September 2006 (known as Project 15/30). The main aspects of this substantial project were: (i) the re-alignment of the University’s standard module size from multiples of 10 credits to multiples of 15 (permitted variants are 15, 30, 45 and 60); (ii) the consequential re-writing of all pathways (involving a complete rationalisation of provision) and; (iii) the significant revision of the University’s Academic Regulations for all taught modular pathways.
As part of Anglia Ruskin’s evaluation of this major project, External Examiners are asked, as part of their annual report for the 2006/07 academic year, to comment on the implementation of: (i) the new curriculum, in particular the new and revised modules and; (ii) the new Academic Regulations.
74 7. General issues of interest of or concern relating to curriculum structure, content, delivery or assessment a) any examples of good practice in teaching, learning and assessment which could usefully be disseminated within Anglia Ruskin University
[Anglia Ruskin defines good practice as a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which has, over an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (e.g. students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners, employers.) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in other areas of the institution. Such good practice can be evidenced in a variety of ways. Examples include student performance, statistical information, feedback from stakeholders (e.g. via questionnaires, Programme Committee meetings, Employer Liaison Panel meetings etc.).]
b) any commendable achievements and/or outcomes that should be highlighted to a wider audience
c) any weaknesses which should be addressed by the teaching team [NB: responses under this section will be reported formally to the Anglia Ruskin Senate and will require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty]
d) any aspects where Anglia Ruskin University’s academic standards may be at risk [NB: responses under this section will be reported formally to the Anglia Ruskin Senate and will require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty]
Thank you for completing this report and for your contribution to the assurance and enhancement of academic standards at Anglia Ruskin University in 2006/07.
75 76 External Examiner’s Annual Report 2006/07 Tier 2 – Faculty Awards Board
SECTION A - Cover Sheet
Please forward your annual report to the Director, Academic & Quality Systems Office, together with your claim form (F15) for fees and expenses. Annual fees will only be paid on production of an annual report. Please note that a separate report must be produced for each separate duty to which you are appointed (please see letter of appointment for more details).
The Academic & Quality Systems Office will acknowledge receipt of your report which will be forwarded to relevant colleagues in the University.
THIS REPORT WILL BE COPIED AND CIRCULATED WIDELY THROUGHOUT THE UNIVERSITY. THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL IF THIS FORM IS COMPLETED IN TYPESCRIPT.
External Examiner:
Faculty Awards Board:
Date(s) of Faculty Awards Board(s) attended:
Please indicate if you are also acting (in respect of this Board) for other awarding or professional bodies involved in this award:
If you are acting for Edexcel, please detail the BTEC programme titles and numbers:
Signature of External Examiner:
Date:
The Director, Academic & Quality Systems Office, Anglia Ruskin University, Bishop Hall Road, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 1SQ. Electronic versions can be sent to: [email protected] [Please note that all annual reports must be submitted to the University by 30th September 2007 (31st August 2007 for examiners with Edexcel responsibilities)]
77 SECTION B – Data for External Publication
External Examiner’s home institution or professional/ institutional affiliation:
Faculty Awards Board:
In accordance with HEFCE’s Guidance on Information on Quality and Standards in Higher Education (HEFCE 03/51, October 2003) please complete the following sections:
Yes No in the view of the External Examiner, the processes for the determination of awards are sound and fairly conducted. If no, please provide a statement of the respects in which they fall short
where appropriate, please provide a description or bullet point list of any particular strengths or distinctive or innovative features in relation to standards and assessment processes that would be worth drawing to the attention of external audiences.
78 SECTION C – Comments on Service Provided by Anglia Ruskin
External Examiner:
Faculty Awards Board:
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study did you receive:
a briefing pack with your formal letter of appointment containing: Yes No information about Anglia Ruskin University and the University’s Modular Scheme Anglia Ruskin University’s Academic Regulations the Senate Codes of Practice on (i) External Examiners for Taught Programmes of Study and (ii) the Assessment of Students? further briefing from the Faculty/Department about the curriculum for the subject area to which you have been appointed and the associated assessment process and procedures?
For the following questions please indicate your judgement using the following categories: A = agree strongly B = agree C = unable to judge D = disagree E = disagree strongly A B C D E Did the Faculty/Department teaching team establish effective communication with you throughout the year?
Were you given in sufficient time the material you required to fulfil your role as an External Examiner for an Awards Board?
Yes No Did you receive written feedback on your previous report [NB does not apply to the first year of appointment]? Were you satisfied with the response to the issues you raised in your previous report?
79 SECTION D – Main Report
YOUR MAIN REPORT SHOULD COVER THE FOLLOWING TOPICS (as stated in the Senate Code of Practice on External Examiners)
1. Assessment Procedures a) sensitivity and fairness in relation to students’ awards
b) the conduct of Faculty Awards Boards, including consistency in decision making and the accuracy of papers and marksheets for meetings
c) administrative arrangements for the provision of information/material to External Examiners
2. Determination of awards a) the regulations and procedures governing the determination of those awards under consideration by the Faculty Awards Board/Professional Awards Board and their comparability with those of similar awards at other UK higher education institutions
80 3. Special Additional Question for Academic Year 2006/07: Project 15/30 Implementation During the 2005/06 academic year, the University revised its entire taught modular curriculum for delivery from September 2006 (known as Project 15/30). The main aspects of this substantial project were: (i) the re-alignment of the University’s standard module size from multiples of 10 credits to multiples of 15 (permitted variants are 15, 30, 45 and 60); (ii) the consequential re-writing of all pathways (involving a complete rationalisation of provision) and; (iii) the significant revision of the University’s Academic Regulations for all taught modular pathways.
As part of Anglia Ruskin’s evaluation of this major project, External Examiners are asked, as part of their annual report for the 2006/07 academic year to comment on the implementation of: (i) the new curriculum and; (ii) the new Academic Regulations.
81 4. General issues of interest or concern relating to assessment procedures and the determination of awards including the overall assessment scheme a) any examples of good practice which could usefully be disseminated within Anglia Ruskin University [Anglia Ruskin defines good practice as a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which has, over an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (e.g. students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners, employers.) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in other areas of the institution. Such good practice can be evidenced in a variety of ways. Examples include student performance, statistical information, feedback from stakeholders (e.g. via questionnaires, Programme Committee meetings, Employer Liaison Panel meetings etc.).]
b) any commendable achievements and/or outcomes that should be highlighted to a wider audience
c) any weaknesses which should be addressed [NB: responses under this section will be reported formally to the Anglia Ruskin Senate and will require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty]
d) any aspects where Anglia Ruskin University’s academic standards may be at risk [NB: responses under this section will be reported formally to the Anglia Ruskin Senate and will require a specific response to the Senate by the appropriate Faculty]
Thank you for completing this report and for your contribution to the assurance and enhancement of academic standards at Anglia Ruskin University in 2006/07.
82