Skip main navigation and go to content

Briefing information for external examiners

Introduction

This section of the website collates all of the existing information and advice on external examining in one area.

The information is primarily intended to assist Heads of School, course leaders and quality assurance staff who are seeking to brief external examiners on examining ARB prescribed qualifications. The guidance is also likely to be of relevance to those involved in dealing with ARB prescribed qualifications and/or those preparing to submit an application for prescription to ARB.

We would welcome any feedback that you may have in relation to all of our on-line information. If you would like to get in touch, please use the contact details below.

The briefing information is divided under the subject headings below. Please click on a link to access the relevant section of interest.

For further details on guidance in respect of external examining and reporting, please contact Ed Crowe (edc@arb.org.uk) and Grant Dyble (grantd@arb.org.uk).

Statements on ARB Criteria within External Examiners’ Reports

ARB imposes no requirements on institutions with regard to external examiners and their roles. Rather ARB offers guidance as to what it expects from institutions in relation to its external examiners and their reports.

However, ARB expects institutions to seek the views of its external examiners as to whether or not all students meet all the criteria. Given the key role that external examiners play in assuring quality and standards, ARB would normally expect to be given the views of external examiners as to whether or not they consider that all students gaining the prescribed award had met the Board's criteria. This is most evident to ARB where external examiners have made statements in their reports to this effect. Statements relating to whether or not standards compare favourably with other similar institutions etc are not considered to be an acceptable substitute.

ARB expects (but does not require) external examiners making such statements to explain how and on what basis their views are formed. For example, any examiner making a statement that all students have met the criteria and explaining how they have come to that conclusion will clearly be constructive in ARB deducing that the assertion is well founded.

Institutions requiring its external examiners to make this statement will assist ARB in having confidence in the standards being achieved by students in relation to the criteria. In recent years, ARB has found that institutions have, in consultation with their Academic Registries, altered their standard external examiner report forms to allow and encourage external examiners to comment on this matter.

Evidence Based on Samples of Work Examined

ARB does not expect the work of each and every student to be examined. In most cases this would neither be practicable nor desirable to do so. A statement confirming that all students had met all the criteria may validly be formed on the basis of a thorough examination of representative samples. Since those with the lowest pass levels generally have the most difficulty in meeting the criteria the samples should ordinarily include those at that level and below. For example, 50% of the academic portfolios awarded the lowest marks, including the three very lowest passes, plus a robust sample of other work at higher levels to ensure that those students have also met the criteria.

Style of Reporting by External Examiners

It is important to bear in mind that ARB does not expect to see bland, uncritical external examiners' reports. ARB is concerned that in recent years, some external examiners’ reports have been too anodyne and that reports do not provide a basis for ARB to have confidence that an institution’s quality assurance systems will ensure that all students have met, and will continue to meet, all the criteria.  As such, it is these anodyne reports, rather than critical reports, which are more likely to jeopardize the prescribed status of a qualification.  Furthermore, if external examiners comment and confirm that all students have met the criteria, this then enables the examiners to provide robust critical comment without fear of this being misunderstood as relating to concerns about the threshold standard.  In the absence of such a statement, it is often not clear to ARB whether critical comments relate to concerns about the threshold standard, or whether these are intended to identify areas for improvement above that standard.  Therefore, ARB will expect to see reports which highlight problems and issues for improvement where these exist.

Responses from the Institution to its External Examiners’ Reports

Thorough and timely responses to external examiners' comments may demonstrate to ARB whether or not there are robust mechanisms in place to deal with issues as and when they arise. ARB will expect to see thorough departmental responses to external examiners’ reports, as well as any action plans which result from the external examiners’ recommendations.  This helps to provide ARB with the confidence that the institution/department is aware of and, if appropriate, is dealing with any issues which arise.

Appointment and Briefing of External Examiners

The Board is likely to have confidence in an institution which can demonstrate that it has in place mechanisms to ensure that appropriately qualified external examiners are appointed, that external examiners have been advised of their role and responsibilities, and that its external examiners have been appropriately briefed and are familiar with the Board's criteria. 

Annual Monitoring Submissions to ARB

Following the 2007/2008 cycle of prescription applications, all institutions will then fall under ARB’s annual monitoring regime.  This will provide an opportunity for ARB to appraise the relationship between annual monitoring submissions and the current four yearly cycle of reviews as the basis for its continued confidence that students are meeting ARB’s criteria.  One option will be for ARB to adopt a more flexible and risk-based approach to the requirement for periodic review.  Heavier reliance could be placed on annual monitoring, rather than periodic reviews being routinely conducted every four years.  However, the ability of ARB to take this approach will be dependent on the quality of annual monitoring submissions, with particular emphasis being placed on external examiner reports as the basis of ARB’s continued confidence that qualifying students are meeting the criteria.

Links to Helpful Websites

Centre for Education in the Built Environment (CEBE)

SCHOSA have liaised with CEBE, ARB, and RIBA, to create a set of guidance notes for external examiners, heads, teachers and administrators in schools of architecture, university registrars, and quality assurance personnel.  The material was published in April 2006.  However, the Guidance is only aimed at External Examiners of Part 1 and Part 2 level. Please use the following link to access the information: http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/publications/briefguides/external_examiners_guides.php .

Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)

ARB is aware of Section 4 of the Quality Assurance Agency's Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education which offers guidance in the area of External Examining. An Institution's ability to engage with the aspects of QAA’s Code relating to professional and statutory body requirements will normally be of interest to ARB.

Please use the following link to access the QAA’s Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/section4/COP_external.pdf .