Download External Examiner Report Template (ONLINE) and more Lecture notes Veterinary in PDF only on Docsity!
External Examiner Report Template (ONLINE)
The following details will continue to be captured via the online reporting process:
- Name(s) of External Examiner(s) contributing to a collaborative or individual report: John McAleer
- Programme Title and Award: MSc Vet Education
- Collaborative partner and location (if applicable)
- Year of Examination
- Examination (only applicable to BVetMed)
- Date(s) of attendance at the RVC
The online system will capture agreed sign-off by each collaborating external examiner or individual where necessary.
Instructions for completion:
- For sections 1 - 4 please type your comments in the spaces provided. You are asked to indicate if you expect to receive a response from the College.
- For section 5, please delete as appropriate (Yes, No or N/A). You are asked to provide additional comments, particularly if you answered ‘No’.
- Names of all students and staff should be omitted from external examiners’ reports, to maintain appropriate confidentiality.
- Unless comments are returned within three weeks of completion of the Exam Board meeting, it may not be possible to act upon these comments in the forthcoming academic year.
- Please return expense claims with receipts attached by post to the Academic Quality Manager, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms, Hatfield, AL9 7TA.
Thank you!
Please comment on the areas detailed below, highlighting the appropriateness and strengths and/or weaknesses.
1. Programme External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 1.1. Course content The course content at all levels- Certificate, Diploma and Masters was appropriate
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
1.2. Learning objectives These seemed to be clearly described and relevant.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 1.3. Teaching methods These seemed to be fine. [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 1.4. Resources (in so far as they affected the assessment)
Fine (^) [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the Programme:
As a new examiner I would like access to the online modules- this would allow more in-depth comment re the above.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: We have now given online access to all our MSc Vet Ed related programmes on Learn.
Please comment on the areas detailed below, highlighting appropriateness and strengths and/or weaknesses.
- Assessment Process External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 3.1. Assessment methods (relevance to learning objectives and curriculum)
The assignments were representative of the outcomes.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
3.2. Extent to which assessment processes are rigorous
As mentioned above the inter- marker agreement was high
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
3.3. Consistency of the level of assessment with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ)
The assignments were designed to assess reflective skills, analysis and synthesis.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
3.4. Standard of marking This was reliable across all formats
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 3.5. Opinion on changes to the assessment process from previous years in which you have examined
N/A [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the assessment process:
I liked the patch assignments and wonder if the feedback on these has an impact on the summative assignments. The quality of feedback is very important and the markers have produced some good in-depth
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: Thank you for the comments and we have analysed the effect of patches on summative assignments and the effect is significantly high. We don’t know whether the effect is due to feedback. This requires analysis. Student progression tend to correlate with feedback. If student numbers increase we may have to re- consider this assessment approach.
comments for the students. Five patches per module works fine with low numbers but it may mean looking again at the workload if numbers increase.
Please comment on the areas detailed below, highlighting strengths and/or weaknesses.
4. Procedures External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 4.1. In your view, are the processes for assessment and the determination of awards sound and fairly conducted? (e.g. Briefing, Exam administration, marking arrangements, Board of Examiners, participation by External examiners)
The procedures in place are clear and the process surrounding the assessment is carried out with rigour and fairness.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
4.2. Opinion on changes to the procedures from previous years in which you have examined
N/A [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the procedures:
I commend both the academic and administrative teams for the efficiency in the delivery of the programme.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
If you have identified any areas of good practice, please comment more fully here. We may use information provided in our annual external examining report:
Do you have any suggestions for improvements based on experience at other institutes? We may use information provided in our annual external examining report:
External Examiner comments: For College information only (Responses to External Examiners are published on the College’s website. Please only use this box to add any comments that you wish to remain confidential, if any)
Thank you for completing this annual report!
All External Examiner reports will be responded to via the following process [http://www.rvc.ac.uk/Examiners/documents/ExternalExaminerReports.pdf] and in time for the annual RVC Inset Day on Assessment.
At the MSc stage I would recommend that the literature review (which is currently a separate assignment) be combined with the article for the peer reviewed journal – one assignment rather than two. I feel the courser are well run and administered and look forward to my term as external examiner.
RVC response: We have decided to remove the literature review part of the assessment and will be revising the awards and assessment regulations for 2014-
The following details will continue to be captured via the online reporting process:
- Name(s) of External Examiner(s) contributing to a collaborative or individual report: Susan Rhind
- Programme Title and Award: MSc/Pg Dip/Pg Cert Veterinary Education
- Collaborative partner and location (if applicable)
- Year of Examination
- Examination (only applicable to BVetMed)
- Date(s) of attendance at the RVC
The online system will capture agreed sign-off by each collaborating external examiner or individual where necessary.
Instructions for completion:
Please comment on the areas detailed below, highlighting the appropriateness and strengths and/or weaknesses.
- For sections 1 - 4 please type your comments in the spaces provided. You are asked to indicate if you expect to receive a response from the College.
- For section 5, please delete as appropriate (Yes, No or N/A). You are asked to provide additional comments, particularly if you answered ‘No’.
- Names of all students and staff should be omitted from external examiners’ reports, to maintain appropriate confidentiality.
- Unless comments are returned within three weeks of completion of the Exam Board meeting, it may not be possible to act upon these comments in the forthcoming academic year.
- Please return expense claims with receipts attached by post to the Academic Quality Manager, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms, Hatfield, AL9 7TA.
Thank you!
7. Student performance External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 7.1. Students’ performance in relation to those at a similar stage on comparable courses in other institutions, where this is known to you
As the only vet med specific MSC in vet education there are no directly comparable courses however the standards seem appropriately aligned with MScs in medical education that I am aware of
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
7.2. Quality of candidates’ knowledge and skills, with particular reference to those at the top, middle or bottom of the range
Distinction candidates were clearly very capable across the range of assessments. Likewise at the lower end, the overall mark profile led to a convincing body of evidence on which to make sound decisions
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the students’ performance:
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please comment on the areas detailed below, highlighting appropriateness and strengths and/or weaknesses.
- Assessment Process External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 8.1. Assessment methods (relevance to learning objectives and curriculum)
Generally good with excellent detailed feedback given on the patches
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
8.2. Extent to which assessment processes are rigorous
Largely – my only reservation relates to the oral assessment and the weighting for such a subjective piece of judgement
[ ] Response: Please see response to 3.5. Action (if any) date & name:
8.3. Consistency of the level of assessment with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ)
consistent [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
8.4. Standard of marking Sound process of double marking in place. Striking consistency when double marking used implies that rubric descriptors are working well
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
8.5. Opinion on changes to the assessment process from previous years in which you have examined
I was interested and impressed by the inclusion of the video diary reflection in ELTT
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the assessment process:
Regarding my point in 3.2 above, it was clear whilst observing the orals process and subsequent marking
[ ]
Response: Action (if any) date & name: This was raised during the exam board meeting and the current marking scheme for the oral exams. This has been discussed at
9. Procedures External Examiner comments: For Publication
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (Where the response requires action(s), each action must be outlined, a completion date given and a responsible individual named) 9.1. In your view, are the processes for assessment and the determination of awards sound and fairly conducted? (e.g. Briefing, Exam administration, marking arrangements, Board of Examiners, participation by External examiners)
Yes although we discussed at the board meeting that given the increasing numbers of candidates and complexity of the progression options, a move to a 2 day visit should be considered.
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: Thank you for agreeing to do this. As we also have more MSc projects to examine during the 2014 exam board a two-day meeting will be planned.
9.2. Opinion on changes to the procedures from previous years in which you have examined
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
Please provide any additional comments and recommendations regarding the procedures:
[ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
10. General Statements [YES] [NO] 14 [N/A] check as appropriate
Additional comments, particularly if your answer was no:
A response from the College is required, if yes, please check the box [ ]
College Response: (All responses leading to an action must note an identified timeframe and responsible individual. Please outline the action and a date by which the action will be taken) 10.1. Comments I have made in previous years have been addressed to my satisfaction
[YES] [NO]
[N/A]
Partially – I recall both externals expressed some concerns last year about the oral/ weighting/ clarity on what was being assessed issue
[ ] Response: Please see the response to 3.5.
Action (if any) date & name:
5.13. An acceptable response has been made [YES] [NO] [N/A]
See above [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 5.14. I approved the papers for the Examination [N/A} [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 5.15. I was able to scrutinise an adequate sample of students’ work and marks to enable me to carry out my duties
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
5.16. I attended the meeting of the Board of Examiners held to approve the results of the Examination
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
5.17. Candidates were considered impartially and fairly
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 5.18. The standards set for the awards are appropriate for qualifications at this level, in this subject
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
5.19. The standards of student performance are comparable with similar programmes or subjects in other UK institutions with which I am familiar
[YES] (^) [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
5.20. I have received enough support to carry out my role
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 5.21. I have received sufficient information to carry out my role (where information was insufficient, please give details)
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
5.22. Appropriate procedures and processes have been followed
[YES] [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name: 5.23. The processes for assessment and the determination of awards are sound
[YES] (^) [ ] Response: Action (if any) date & name:
