EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S REPORT

General Introduction

1. Each External Examiner for Aberystwyth University is required to make an annual written
report to the Vice-Chancellor of the University. AU regards the reports of External Examiners
as a key element of its quality assurance system and asks Examiners to provide full and
constructive comments which will help to maintain and enhance provision, to safeguard the
standards of awards, and to identify good practice for dissemination. In doing so it engages
with Section B7 of the QAA Quality Code on External Examining, December 2011, which can
be consulted at:

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/quality-code-B7.aspx

2. Reports are circulated to the Head of Department, Institute Manager and Vice-Chancellor.
The Department is asked to respond to each Examiner on points raised in the report. Issues
arising from reports are also considered by the Quality Assurance Committee and then by
the Academic Board at its November meeting. A minute of that meeting will be sent to each
External Examiner. The committee may ask the Pro Vice-Chancellor who chairs the
Academic Board to reply directly to individual Examiners on specific points.

3. All reports will be published on the Departmental AberLearn Blackboard. A copy of the final
report of an external examiner will also be passed to his or her successor and will be made
available to external assessors taking part in periodic study scheme reviews. Reports may
also be requested by the QAA as part of its Institutional Review process.

4. A separate form should be completed for Undergraduate and Taught Masters’ schemes if an
External Examiner is involved at the undergraduate and postgraduate level. In such cases,
please indicate clearly the titles of the scheme(s) to which your report refers.

5. Please do not refer to individual candidates by name in the report, and if possible avoid
reference to individual members of staff by name.

6. An External Examiner who considers it appropriate may send a separate, confidential report
directly to the Vice-Chancellor to draw attention to any matters of acute concern.

7. To ensure that reports can be considered fully by departments and by the relevant
committees of the University, please return this form to the Academic Quality and Records
Office NO LATER THAN FOUR WEEKS AFTER THE SEMESTER TWO EXAMINATION BOARD
HAS MET. Payment of fees will be authorised upon receipt of an appropriate report by the
Academic Quality and Records Office, to which all enquiries should be directed. Since your
report will be photocopied, please present it in typewritten or word-processed form. When
the form is complete please return the electronic copy to cvd@aber.ac.uk

AND a signed copy by post, in the envelope provided, to:

Academic Quality and Records Office

Aberystwyth University
Cledwyn Building
Penglais Campus
Aberystwyth
Ceredigion SY23 3DD

8. Please complete all sections of the report, using separate sheets if necessary.
Name of examiner: Huw Dylan

Scheme of study and subject(s) examined: Gwleidyddiaeth Rhyngwladol (israddedig)

Report for academic session: 2013-14

Signed: Huw Dylan Dated:26/6/2014

Department Response: International Politics

Respondent: Christian Enemark
Position: Chair, Undergraduate Examination Board
Signed: Dated: 10 September 2014

1. OVERVIEW OF ACADEMIC STANDARDS

1.1 Academic standards of awards

Please comment generally on the academic standards of awards. Are the standards set appropriate
for the level of award, and are they consistent with standards at other UK Higher Education Institutions
with which you are familiar and with the National Qualifications Framework? See:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/Qualifications/Pages/default.aspx

YES

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our academic standards.

1.2 Student achievement

Please comment on the standards of student performance in the study schemes or parts of the
schemes examined. Are these comparable with the standards of similar programmes in other UK
Higher Education Institutions with which you are familiar?

YES, the work was comparable with the standards of similar programmes I’ve experienced,
with some examples of excellent work by the Welsh medium students.

Department Response
 We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our students’ achievements.

1.3 Assessment processes

Please comment on the University’s processes for assessment, and the determination of awards at
Examining Boards. Were the Examining Boards conducted fairly and in accordance with the
University’s Examination Conventions? If not, please explain.

YES. It was apparent that both the academic and administrative staff took great care to ensure
transparency and fairness.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our assessment processes.

2. ACTIONS TAKEN TO ADDRESS PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Please comment on whether due consideration has been given by the department and the university to
issues raised in your previous report or that of your predecessor. Please highlight any
recommendations which have not been adequately addressed.

I have not undertaken the role of external examiner before. Having read my predecessor’s
report I’m satisfied that her recommendations have been considered. One point regarded the
quantity of worked that was second marked, which, judging by the work I’ve seen, seems not to
be an issue. Another point concerned the decoupling of supervision and marking for
dissertations – which appeared to be more of a point for discussion rather than a
recommendation – and which is something the department has considered.

Department Response

We acknowledge the desirability of decoupling dissertation supervision and marking, and we

will investigate the feasibility of doing so.
3. SCHEME CONTENT, STRUCTURE AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

3.1 Please comment on how the content, structure and learning outcomes set out in the programme
specification(s) engage with relevant published national subject benchmarks or the expectations of
relevant professional bodies. See:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/subject-guidance/Pages/Subject-benchmark-
statements.aspx
http://www.aber.ac.uk/en/programme-specs/

I don’t think there can be any doubt that the department has robust procedures for clearly
setting, structuring, and communicating learning outcomes. They are easily available, clear and
comprehensive. The aims, expectations, and assessment pattern for each module is clearly set
out for the students at the start of the year. And the reading materials are set out in a clear
manner that helps the students structure their research to help achieve the learning objectives.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our programmes.

3.2 Please comment on the range of assessment methods used in the scheme(s) that you examined. Are
these effective in measuring the learning outcomes of the scheme(s) of study?

The mix of assessment modes seems very useful for students, helping them develop vital
communication skills. The traditional mix is supplemented by more reflective pieces such as a
work experience diary, and I applaud this type of innovation, and the willingness to deviate a
little from convention.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our assessment processes.
3.3 Distinctive Features
Please summarise any notable strengths or distinctive or innovative elements of the study schemes
that you examined.

Reflecting on our experience of managing the dissertation process, I thing that the recent development
of the students submitting a research proposal (commented upon by my predecessor) is an excellent
idea. Given the number of marks associated with the dissertation, and the importance of helping
students develop research skills, the extra support is most welcome.
I also think that a distinctive feature of this course is the close relationship the students can develop
with their tutors. This is good for support, feedback, and (presumably) for student satisfaction.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the excellent support given to our students on the
Dissertation module.

4. ASSESSMENT OF MODULES

4.1 Methods of Assessment: How appropriate and effective are the various forms of assessment operating
in the modules for which you are responsible?

The methods of assessment seem appropriate and effective. I think that the assessment
patterns allow good students to display their talents, and that the mode and content of the
feedback is comprehensive and supportive, and helpful for students who need to develop their
work.
As I noted in my report, I would note that care should be taken to ensure that the relatively
small number of markers on the courses remain objective when second marking/ moderating
others’ work. (There is no evidence to suggest that they are not, but it may be something to
bear in mind.)

Department Response

We are confident that all academics in the Department are committed to objectivity in marking
their own and their colleagues’ students’ work.
4.2 Assessment Criteria and Marking:
Please comment on each of the following:
 Are appropriate assessment criteria in place for each mode of assessment?
 Does internal marking reflect the published criteria?
 Was there clear, consistent evidence of internal moderation and/or second marking?
 Are marking standards appropriate and consistent?

Yes, there is very little to say for each of these categories. The criteria are appropriate, clear,
and available to students. I believe the marking and the comments reflect the criteria. A good
proportion of work on all modules was second marked or moderated (perhaps on some of the
smaller modules this could have been increased to the whole module without creating an
overly onerous administrative load). One of the benefits of a relatively small cohort of markers
is that the standards are consistent, as is the case here.

Department Response

We will continue to subject to a moderation process a proportion of work that is broadly

consistent across modules.

5. GOOD PRACTICE IN LEARNING AND TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT

5.1 Please provide examples of any particularly good practice in learning and teaching or assessment
which you feel should be commended to other departments.

As I noted in 3.3, I think that the attention devoted to the research proposal, and the
opportunity this gives the students to engage with the relevant literature and ideas earlier than
they might otherwise do, is a welcome development. Hopefully, it will lead to students feeling
more supported, and should yield better work.

The reading and discussion groups, which feature in many modules, are also a very positive
development. I think that this is particularly so in the case of Welsh medium students who can
sometimes feel a little isolated.
 Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of our good practice in relation to Dissertation
support and the provision of reading/discussion groups.

6. SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES

6.1 Induction and Information: Please confirm that you were provided with adequate information in the
following areas, by the University and department, to enable you to discharge your duties.
 the role and duties of the External Examiner
 report of and response to the previous External Examiner (first year)
 examination systems and conventions
 study scheme and module details
 assessment formats and criteria

Please comment further on the quality of information provided to you, noting any areas for
improvement.

Yes. Before and during the board there was excellent communication regarding the role and duties of
the external examiner. The support given by the Interpol office was first rate. And the manner in which
the board was conducted was a credit to the institution.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our induction and information
processes.

6.2 Moderation and Sampling: Please confirm that in each semester:

 you had the opportunity to comment on draft examination questions and associated guidance
for assessors
 sufficient assessed/examination work was made available to enable you to have confidence in
your evaluation of the standard of student work
 sufficient evidence of internal moderation was made available for you to have confidence in the
internal moderation processes
Please comment further on any issues relating to moderation and sampling

Yes, I’ve no doubt that the process is robust. Indeed, given the relatively small number of students a
large proportion of the work is moderated.
 Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our moderation and sampling
processes.

6.3 Conduct of Examination Boards:

Please comment on the conduct of the Examination Board. You should include information on:

The organisation and administration of the Examination Board and the procedures used to give
consideration to students’ special circumstances

Please also confirm that decisions on the following were taken in accordance with University
conventions:
 the classification of degrees and operation of the window of opportunity (undergraduate awards
only)
 progression to Part Two, and award of merit and distinction(taught postgraduate awards only)
 exit awards of certificates and diplomas at undergraduate or postgraduate level
 award of resit indicators and decisions on students unable to complete the qualification

You may also wish to comment further on other matters relating to the conduct of Examination Boards.

As I have noted above, I am very happy with the organisation and administration of the exam
board. It is clear that a significant amount of work had been done prior to the board to identify
those students with special circumstances or those who gained the window of opportunity. The
rules and regulations were explained in a presentation beforehand, as well as in the written
material. Each case was explained and considered, as were the cases where students deferred
or failed. I believe that everything was conducted according to university conventions.

Department Response

We are grateful for this acknowledgement of the quality of our examinations processes.
7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION / FINAL EXIT REPORT

Please comment on any other significant issues which you feel are appropriate, and suggest any
opportunities for further development. If you are in the last year of your appointment, you should
provide an overview of your term of office, commenting on matters such as significant development or
enhancement of:

 programme structures, learning outcomes or content

 assessment methods
 teaching methods
 examination procedures or conventions

As I have noted, I believe that the manner in which the modules are designed and presented is
excellent. They are well structured and marry literature with topics in a way that students can
easily grasp. Two points:
1. I do wonder whether more could be made of e-resources. (Obviously, I must note that
the students may get guidance elsewhere about the range of e-resources available
through Hugh Owen.) But it strikes me that, given the manner in which undergraduates,
‘digital natives’ all, access information, more might be made of online repositories of
information (like the Digital National Security archive, for example) to supplement the
more traditional journals.
2. Perhaps more could be said about referencing in the module handbooks. (Noting, again,
that they may of course get much more guidance elsewhere.) There was the odd case of
students who seemingly had not grasped the intricacies of referencing, even by the 3rd
year. This, it seems to me, is a relatively common problem, certainly not limited to this
degree. But perhaps a little note accompanying the essay questions (referencing is
important: this is an incomplete reference… this is a complete reference… for more
information see…) would be useful?

The assessment methods seem appropriate. I believe that the feedback form is a valuable
document for students. There was discussion of moving to Turnitin for essay submission and
marking. I use and like Turnitin, but I’d suggest that the department try to find a way to keep the
useful features of the current system, like the grid on the upper portion of the marking sheet,
and integrate them into a new system.

In general I was very happy with the work I received and thought the process was managed
excellently.

Department Response

1. Increasingly, we are making essential readings available in electronic form on the

BlackBoard site for modules. When we recommend the acquisition of books for the University
Library, an increasing number of these are purchased as e-books. We do not seek or retain
subscriptions to journals that are only available in hardcopy. Selected online repositories of
information are made available to students when the cost of access is justified by the (likely)
degree of use.

2. We provide detailed advice on referencing in an annually-updated booklet, ‘Writing and

Referencing in Interpol’, which is available electronically and in hardcopy to all students.

Recent Turnitin training for academics includes instructions on generating a marking ‘rubric’
 which can be designed to incorporate the six marking criteria listed in the annually-updated
booklet ‘Studying in Interpol’. From 2014/15, individual academics will continue to provide
feedback in respect of those six criteria, and the format of the rubric will be based on an
individual academic’s judgement of what works best.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Date Received

Date Acknowledged

Fee Authorised

Date sent to Department

Date departmental response

received