Learning and Teaching Committee

Subject: Sharing external examiners’ reports with students

The Programme Quality Team recommends to Learning and Teaching Committee that departments be required in future to release their external examiners’ reports, and the departmental responses, for discussion at the relevant Staff/Student Committees.

Background

1. The Quality Assurance Framework (QAF) Review Group, in the report on phase 2 of its work (HEFCE October 2006/45), recommended that HEIs should no longer be expected to publish qualitative data, including the summaries of external examiners’ reports, on the TQI site.

2. The Group coupled this with a recommendation that institutions should share external examiners’ reports as a matter of course with student representatives, for example through staff-student committees, for the reasons set out in the report. HEFCE will look to the QAA to provide assurance in the context of institutional audit and mid-cycle reviews that this expectation is being met.

3. The report emphasises the reliance placed by the QAF on the external examiner system in maintaining standards and notes the contributions it might make to public accountability. As regards involvement of students, paragraph 41 of the report reads:

In order to ensure that feedback from external examiners is not lost to the student body, and also to ensure transparency, the QAFRG recommends that institutions should share external examiners’ reports as a matter of course with institutional student representatives (student union officers and course representatives). This might be dome through staff-student committees for example. This could strengthen students’ involvement in quality assurance and enhancement, and enable them to work with institutions on improvements. The National Union of Students will offer support and guidance to the local student representatives as necessary.

Internal discussion and consultation

4. The Programme Development & Quality Team at its March meeting considered the question of how external examiners’ reports should be shared with student representatives at Loughborough, and what advice should be offered to departments on the matter.

5. PDQ was aware that some departments had already expressed misgivings about how they might be expected to involve students, about the effect on the frankness of EEs’ reports in future, and about the possibility of EEs’ comments (about marking, for example) generating dissatisfaction amongst students which might potentially result in appeals or complaints.

6. A paper was subsequently sent to all departments for comment, rehearsing arguments for and against, whilst indicating that it was the view of PDQ on balance that departments should be asked release their EEs’ reports, and the departmental responses to the reports, to the relevant staff/student committees for discussion at an appropriate point in the year.

7. Four points in particular were highlighted:

(i) In regard to meeting HEFCE and QAA expectations, all HEIs would be in the same position. Some HEIs already discussed EEs’ reports with their student reps. (Information from elsewhere indicates that others are now beginning to adopt this approach.)

(ii) The EE would be party to the marks approved by the Programme Board, and any criticism of the marking in the EE’s report would not be grounds for student appeals against the approved marks.

(iii) The production of the TQI-style ‘summaries’ of EEs’ reports had been discontinued at national level as being burdensome and of little value. PDQ felt it would therefore be inappropriate for the University to ask EEs to continue producing a similar summary report expressly for student information alongside their main report. The possibility of asking EEs to complete an extra section within their report aimed specifically at students was not considered a desirable alternative.

(iv) The intention would be to restrict the availability of EEs’ reports amongst the students in the department, to the student members of the SSC concerned with the programme(s); and that the reports should be treated as confidential documents, not to be circulated, copied, or quoted out of context by those who receive them.

8. A majority of the responses received from departments raised no serious objections to the proposal that EEs’ reports should be discussed in staff/student committees, although a significant number raised some reservations; and some were altogether opposed to the proposal. Many responses reflected the concern that the proposal would inhibit EEs’ comments and result in a lack of frankness in their reports.

9. One suggestion was that to emphasise the need to treat the EEs’ reports as confidential documents, they should only be handed out in hard copy to the student representatives at the meeting and not taken away.

10. Another suggestion which came from several departments was that EEs should be offered the opportunity of making confidential comments that were reserved for staff only.

11. Responding to departmental comments, the PDQ Team noted

(i) That one of the most useful inputs from the EE was generally at the Programme Board, when a full and frank exchange of views could take place: there was no reason why this should not continue to be the case.

(ii) That the suggestion that the reports be handed out at the SSC meeting and collected in again was considered likely to be counter-productive.

(iii) That it was the intention to inform all EEs before they submitted their reports that their reports would go to meetings including student representatives.

Outcome of consultation and advice to LTC

12. The PDQ Team has agreed, following the consultation and discussion that has taken place, to recommend to Learning and Teaching Committee that departments be required in future to release their external examiners’ reports, and the departmental responses, for discussion at the relevant Staff/Student Committees.

13. It has also agreed to couple this proposal with a second recommendation that, on a trial basis, subject to review after the 2007/08 Programme Boards, an extra section be added to the report form to allow EEs, if they so wish, to include comments they consider should be confidential and not be shared with student representatives.

14. LTC is asked to consider these recommendations.