External Examiner Report Form for Taught Programmes 2017-18

As well as answering the specific yes/no questions, external examiners are asked to provide qualitative comments in each section, to assist the University, Faculty and the programme team in managing standards and quality effectively. Please also ensure that any recommendations are listed in section 9 of this template.

Please ensure all sections of this form are fully completed where indicated. If a report is considered to be deficient in respect of the information provided, you may be asked for additional comments.

External examiners are asked to write one report for the cluster of programmes at the same level for which they examine and to highlight where comments relate to a specific programme within that cluster. Separate reports for undergraduate and postgraduate level programmes are required.

If the report includes a programme(s) delivered under collaborative arrangements, please provide comments relating to each location(s) of delivery to help inform the University’s oversight of the academic standards and quality of learning opportunities when programmes are delivered at collaborative partners.

Please return your report (in this format) by email to the Vice-President (Education), via qsa@soton.ac.uk no more than four weeks after the final Board of Examiners meeting for the academic year of the report. Your report will be acknowledged by a member of the Quality, Standards and Accreditation Team and forwarded to the Faculty. If you experience any difficulties completing this form please contact qsa@soton.ac.uk

The programme team will respond to the external examiner’s comments in each section of the report. If a programme offers modules owned by another Faculty, each Faculty concerned will be given an opportunity to respond to the comments made by the external examiner on this form.

External examiner reports cannot be considered confidential. The University is committed to making its external examiner reports publicly available, and your report will be available to all students. Your report therefore must not name, or otherwise identify any student or staff member on the programme(s) or module(s) that you are reporting on.

If you wish to make a separate confidential report directly to the President and Vice-Chancellor on any matter of serious concern and/or to ask that the report below be considered by the President and Vice-Chancellor directly, please email Vice-Chancellor@soton.ac.uk.

Please note that payment of fees cannot be authorised until a fully completed report form for the year has been received (both reports if you cover both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes). Claim forms for fees and costs/subsistence are available here https://www.southampton.ac.uk/quality/external_examiners/fees.page.

External examiner details

Name of Faculty:	Choose an item.
Name of external examiner:	Click here to enter text.
External examiner’s home institution:	Click here to enter text.
Programme(s)/modules(s) examined (please ensure all programmes/modules which this report relates to are listed)	Click here to enter text.
Place of delivery (if the programme is not delivered at the University of Southampton): (if ‘other’ selected please state place)	Choose an item.
Year of appointment:	Choose an item.
Date of report submission:	Click here to enter text.

Threshold academic standards of awards and student achievement

2.1	Are the academic standards and the standards of student achievement in the programme examined comparable with the standards of similar programmes, or parts of programmes, in other UK higher education institutions with which you are familiar?	Choose an item.
2.2	If the programme(s)/module(s) are delivered under collaborative arrangements, are the academic standards and the standards of student achievement comparable with their peers at the University of Southampton UK campus?	Choose an item.
2.3	Are the threshold academic standards for the awards (or award elements) in alignment with the standards set by national subject benchmarks, the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ), any relevant Professional Statutory Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements and the relevant University programme specification(s)?	Choose an item.
2.4	For those external examiners not in their first year of appointment, are the standards and achievement of students a comparable standard to those in previous years?	Choose an item.
Please expand on your responses above to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Assessment methods and the appropriateness of these to intended learning outcomes

3.1	Did the assessment methods measure student achievement rigorously and fairly against the intended learning outcomes of the programme(s) and modules?	Choose an item.
3.2	Please comment on the range and appropriateness of assessment methods, whether assessment criteria, marking schemes and arrangements for classification are set at the appropriate level and whether the assessment criteria are applied appropriately and communicated effectively to students. Click here to enter text.
Please expand on your responses above to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

4.	Assessment process

4.1	Was the process for assessment, examination and the determination of awards conducted soundly, equitably and fairly in line with the relevant University policies and regulations?	Choose an item.
Please expand on your response above to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Application of procedures relating to special considerations and academic integrity

5.1	Was there evidence at the Board of Examiners that the Faculty had considered any Academic Integrity cases as per the University’s regulations?	Choose an item.
5.2	Was there evidence at the Board of Examiners that the Faculty had held a Special Considerations Board, prior to the Board of Examiners, to make specific recommendations on any special circumstances cases received, as per the University’s regulations?	Choose an item.
Please expand on your response above to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Curriculum, learning and teaching methods and resources

6.1	Does the curriculum remain current?	Choose an item.
6.2	Is the quality and range of learning and teaching methods and resources available to students appropriate?	Choose an item.
6.3	If the programme(s)/module(s) are delivered under collaborative arrangements, is the quality and range of learning and teaching methods and resources available to students comparable with their peers at the University of Southampton UK campus?	Choose an item.
Please expand on your responses above to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements

7.1	Do you have any specific comments to raise regarding PSRB requirements relating to the programme(s)?	Choose an item.
Please expand on your responses above, if appropriate, to provide comment on any particular issues or areas of good practice Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Checklist and information to assist you to complete your duties

a.	Did you receive or have appropriate access to programme handbook(s)?	Choose an item.
b.	Did you receive or have appropriate access to programme regulations (these may be in the programme handbook)?	Choose an item.
c.	Did you receive or have appropriate access to module descriptions (these may be in the programme handbook)?	Choose an item.
d.	Did you receive or have appropriate access to all assessment briefs/marking criteria?	Choose an item.
e.	Did you receive or have appropriate access to QAA subject benchmarks (where relevant)	Choose an item.
f.	(i) Did you receive all draft examination papers for approval?	Choose an item.
(ii) If not, was this by prior arrangement with you?	Choose an item.
g.	Was the nature and level of the questions appropriate?	Choose an item.
h.	Were suitable arrangements made to consider your comments?	Choose an item.
i.	Did you have access to a sufficient number of scripts to be able to assess whether the internal marking and classifications were appropriate and consistent?	Choose an item.
j.	Were you satisfied with the method of selecting the scripts for review?	Choose an item.
k.	Did you receive scripts in sufficient time?	Choose an item.
l.	Were all, or a sufficient number of scripts in the sample you reviewed moderated internally?
m.	Was the general standard and consistency of marking appropriate?	Choose an item.
n.	Were the scripts marked in such a way as to enable you to see the reasons for the award of given marks?	Choose an item.
o.	Was the choice of subjects for dissertations appropriate?	Choose an item.
p.	Were the methods and standard of assessment appropriate?	Choose an item.
q.	Was sufficient coursework made available to you to enable you to make a sound judgement on standards achieved?	Choose an item.
r.	Was the method and general standard of marking and consistency satisfactory?	Choose an item.
s.	Was the coursework marked in such a way as to enable you to see the reasons for the award of given marks?	Choose an item.
t.	Were suitable arrangements made for you to conduct orals and/or moderate performances/recitals/presentations/appropriate professional placements?	Choose an item.
u.	Were you able to attend the Board of Examiners meeting? If not, were alternative arrangements put in place?	Choose an item.
v.	Were you given sufficient notice of the meeting?	Choose an item.
w.	If you did attend was the meeting conducted to your satisfaction in accordance with the University’s policies and procedures?	Choose an item.
x.	Were you satisfied with the recommendations of the Board of Examiners?	Choose an item.
If your response to any of the above questions is ‘No’ please amplify below, or cross-refer to the relevant section in your report. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Recommendations for the Programme Team, Faculty or the University

Please list any key recommendations for action to enhance the programme(s) and the quality of learning opportunities provided to students. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Innovation and good practice

On the basis of your involvement in the programme please identify below anything you consider innovative or particularly good practice. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Recommendations made in previous report(s)

If relevant, please state below whether comments made in your previous report(s) have been, or are being, addressed to your satisfaction. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

First annual report – complete only in your first year of office

Please give a brief overview of your first year in office as external examiner with the University and comment on the effectiveness of the arrangements for your induction. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Final exit report – complete only at the end of your term of office

Please give a brief overview of your time as external examiner with the University and comment on any significant changes in standards over your term of office and/or any other areas that you feel appropriate to highlight. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

Please comment below on whether any concerns you have raised in your reports during your term of office have been addressed to your satisfaction. Click here to enter text.
Programme Team response to the above: Click here to enter text.

For completion by the Faculty:

Once completed and approved by the Faculty, the response is sent to the external examiner, from the University’s central Quality, Standards and Accreditation Team (QSAT). A fully approved response should normally be available within 8 weeks of receipt of the report. If the response is delayed the external examiner can expect to receive an email from the Faculty explaining the reason for this and when the response is expected.

External examiner reports are read by, and discussed within the programme team and other relevant staff in the Faculty. A response to all feedback received is added to this form under the relevant section by the programme team explaining the action taken/to be taken or reasons why action will not be taken. If a programme offers modules owned by another Faculty, each Faculty concerned will be given an opportunity to respond to the comments made by the external examiner on this form.

The Programme Team’s responses are read by the Director of Programmes and approved by the Associate Dean (Education and Student Experience) on behalf of the Faculty Programmes Committee (FPC) as detailed in the relevant boxes below.

Responses to the report made by (insert electronic signature or typed name):
Position:	Programme Leader/Coordinator on behalf of the programme team
Date:	Click here to enter a date.

Responses to the report made by (insert electronic signature or typed name):	Second signature where appropriate
Position:	Programme Leader/Coordinator on behalf of the programme team
Date:	Click here to enter a date.

Responses to the report read and supported by (insert electronic signature or typed name):
Position:	Director of Programmes
Date:	Click here to enter a date.

Responses to the report approved on behalf of Faculty Programmes Committee by (insert electronic signature or typed name):
Position:	Associate Dean (Education and Student Experience) (AD(ESE))
Date:	Click here to enter a date.