External examining: fit for purpose?

Studies in Higher Education

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 195-211

  Bloxham, Sue ^a   Price, Margaret ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CUMBRIA   (United Kingdom)

^b OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

academic standards; assessment; external examiners; judgement; quality

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919862630     PISSN: 03075079     EISSN: 1470174X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2013.823931     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Alderman, G. 2009. Defining and measuring academic standards: A British perspective. Higher Education Management and Policy 21, no. 3: 11–22.
2. Ashworth, M., S. Bloxham, and L. Pearce. 2010. Examining the tension between academic standards and inclusion for disabled students: The impact on marking of individual academics' frameworks for assessment. Studies in Higher Education 35, no. 2: 209–23.
3. Attwood, R. 2010. Nip and tuck for externals? A radical facelift is required. Times Higher Educational Supplement, August 12.
4. Biggs, J. 2002. The reflective institution: Assuring and enhancing the quality of teaching and learning.http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record§ion=generic&id=109
5. BIS. 2009. Higher ambitions: The future of universities in a knowledge economy. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills.
6. Bloxham, S. 2009. Marking and moderation in the UK: False assumptions and wasted resources. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34, no. 2: 209–20.
7. Bloxham, S., and P. Boyd. 2011. Accountability in grading student work: Securing academic standards in a twenty-first century quality assurance context. British Educational Research Journal. doi:10.1080/01411926.2011.569007
8. Bloxham, S., P. Boyd, and S. Orr. 2011. Mark my words: The role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices. Studies in Higher Education 36, no. 6: 655–70.
9. Broad, B. 2000. Pulling your hair out: Crises of standardization in communal writing. Research in the Teaching of English 35: 213–60.
10. Broad, B. 2003. What we really value: Beyond rubrics in teaching and assessing writing. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
11. Brooks, V. 2012. Marking as judgement. Research Papers in Education 27, no. 1: 63–80.
12. Bruner, J.S. 1996. The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Coates, H. 2010. Defining and monitoring academic standards in Australian higher education. Higher Education Management and Policy 22, no. 1: 41–58.
14. Colley, H., and H. Silver. 2005. External examiners and the benchmarking of standards. York: Higher Education Academy.
15. Crisp, V. 2008. Exploring the nature of examiner thinking during the process of examination marking. Cambridge Journal of Education 38, no. 2: 247–64.
16. Crook, C., H. Gross, and R. Dymott. 2006. Assessment relationships in higher education: The tension of process and practice. British Educational Research Journal 32, no. 1: 95–114.
17. Delandshere, G. 2001. Implicit theories, unexamined assumptions and the status quo of educational assessment. Assessment in Education 8, no. 2: 113–33.
18. Delaney, C.M. 2005. The evaluation of university students' written work. British Education Association Conference, September 14–17, in University of Glamorgan.
19. Den Outer, B., K. Handley, and M. Price. 2012. Situational analysis and mapping for use in education research: a reflexive methodology? Studies in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.641527.
20. Dobson, S. 2008a. Applying a validity argument model to three examples of the viva. Nordisk Pedagogik 28: 332–44.
21. Dobson, S. 2008b. Theorising the viva – A qualitative approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33, no. 3: 277–88.
22. Eisner, E.W. 1985. The art of educational evaluation: A personal view. London: Falmer.
23. Elander, J. and D. Hardman. 2002. An application of judgement analysis to examination marking in psychology. British Journal of Psychology 93: 303–28.
24. ESRC. 1989. The role of external examiners. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council.
25. Gaunt, D. 1999. The practitioner as external examiner. Quality in Higher Education 5, no. 1: 81–90.
26. Gilovich, T., D. Griffin, and D. Kahneman, eds. 2002. Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Gipps, C. 1999. Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education 24: 355–92.
28. Greatorex, J. 2000. Is the glass half full or half empty? What examiners really think of candidates' achievement. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Conference, September 7–10, in Cardiff.
29. Habermas, J. 1996 [1992]. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Trans. W. Rehg. Cambridge: MIT Press.
30. Hannan, A., and H. Silver. 2004. Enquiry into the nature of external examining: Final report. York: Higher Education Academy. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record§ion=generic&id=376
31. Hartley, J., M. Trueman, L. Betts, and L. Brodie. 2006. What price presentation? The effects of typographic variables on essay grades. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 31, no. 5: 523–34.
32. Harvey, L. 2002. Evaluation for what? Teaching in Higher Education 7, no. 3: 246–63.
33. Harvey, L. 2004–2012. Analytic quality glossary. Quality research international. http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/ (accessed January 22, 2013).
34. Hawe, E. 2002. Assessment in a pre-service teacher education programme: The rhetoric and the practice of standards-based assessment. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 30: 93–106.
35. HEFCE. 2009. Report of the sub-committee for Teaching, Quality, and the Student Experience: HEFCE's statutory responsibility for quality assurance. Bristol: HEFCE (2009/40).
36. HEQC. 1994. Learning from audit. London: Higher Education Quality Council.
37. HEQC. 1996a. Strengthening external examining. London: Higher Education Quality Council.
38. HEQC. 1996b. Threshold and other academic standards: The views of four subject groups. London: Higher Education Quality Council (DQE226 3/96).
39. HEQC. 1996c. Understanding academic standards in modular frameworks. London: Higher Education Quality Council.
40. Hill, D. 2011. A contentious triangle: Grading and academic freedom in the academy. Higher Education Quarterly 65, no. 1: 3–11.
41. Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee. 2009. Students and universities. London: House of Commons.
42. Kangis, P. 2001. Presentational dimensions and marks awarded to assignments. Quality in Higher Education 7, no. 3: 199–206.
43. Leach, L., G. Neutze, and N. Zepke. 2001. Assessment and empowerment: Some critical questions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 26, no. 4: 293–305.
44. Lindo. Committee. 1985. Academic validation in public sector higher education (Lindop Report). London: HMSO (Cmnd 9501).
45. Martin, S., and C. Cloke. 2000. Standards for the award of qualified teacher status: Reflections on assessment implications. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 25, no. 2: 183–90.
46. Middlehurst, R. 1996. Degree standards and quality assurance: A discussion. In Changing conceptions of academic standards, ed. J. Brennan, 71–96. London: Quality Support Centre, Open University.
47. Milanovic, M., N. Saville, and S. Shuhong. 1996. A study of the decision-making behaviour of composition markers. In Performance testing, cognition and assessment, ed. M. Milanovic, and N. Saville, 92–114. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. Moss, P.A., and A. Schultz. 2001. Educational Standards, Assessment and the search for consensus. American Educational Research Journal 38, no. 1: 37–70.
49. NCIHE. 1997. Higher education in the learning society: Report of the National Committee of Enquiry into Higher Education (Dearing Report). Leeds: NCIHE Publications.
50. Neil, D.T., and D.A. Wadley. 1999. A generic framework for criterion-referenced assessment of undergraduate essays. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 23, no. 3: 303–19.
51. Norcini, J.J., and J.A. Shea. 1997. The credibility and comparability of standards. Applied Measurement in Education 10, no. 1: 39–59.
52. O'Donovan, B., M. Price, and C. Rust. 2004. Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teaching in Higher Education 9, no. 3: 325–35.
53. Orr, S. 2008. Real or imagined? The shift from norm referencing to criterion referencing in higher education. In Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education, ed. A. Havnes, and L. McDowell, 133–44. London: Routledge.
54. Orr, S. 2010. “We kind of try to merge our own experience with the objectivity of the criteria”: The role of connoisseurship and tacit practice in undergraduate fine art assessment. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education 9, no. 1: 5–19.
55. Orrell, J. 2008. Assessment beyond belief: The cognitive process of grading. In Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education, ed A. Havnes and L. McDowell, 251–63. London: Routledge.
56. QAA. 2005. Outcomes from institutional audits: External examiners and their reports. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency.
57. QAA. 2007. The classification of degree awards. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency.
58. QAA. 2009. Thematic enquiries into concerns about academic standards in higher education in England. Gloucester: QAA.
59. QAA. 2012. UK Quality Code for Higher Education.http://www.qaa.ac.uk/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/quality-code/Pages/default.aspx
60. Ross, V. 2009. External music examiners: Micro-macro tasks in quality assurance practices. Music Education Research 11, no. 4: 473–84.
61. Sadler, D.R. 1987. Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education 13, no. 2: 191–209.
62. Sadler, D.R. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18, no. 2: 119–44.
63. Sadler, D.R. 2011. Academic freedom, achievement standards and professional identity. Quality in Higher Education 17, no. 1: 85–100.
64. Satchell, S., and Pratt, J. 2010. The dubiety of double marking. Higher Education Review 42, no. 2: 59–62.
65. Shay, S.B. 2004. The assessment of complex performance: A socially situated interpretive act. Harvard Educational Review 74, no. 3: 307–29.
66. Shay, S. 2005. The assessment of complex tasks: A double reading. Studies in Higher Education 30, no. 6: 663–79.
67. Shay, S. 2008. Beyond social constructivist perspectives on assessment: The centring of knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education 13, no. 5: 595–605.
68. Silver, H., R. Stennett, and R. Williams. 1995. The external examiner system: Possible futures (The Silver Report). London: Higher Education Quality Council.
69. Silver, H., and S. Williams. 1996. Academic standards and the external examiner system. In Changing conceptions of academic standards, ed. J. Brennan, M. Frazer, R. Middlehurst, H. Silver, & R. Williams. 27–48. London: Quality Support Centre, Open University.
70. Tang, S.Y.F. 2008. Issues in field experience assessment in teacher education in a standards based context. Journal of Education for Teaching 34, no. 1: 17–32.
71. Universities UK. 2011. Review of External examiner arrangements in universities and colleges in the UK: Final report and recommendations. London: Universities UK.
72. Universities UK, Guild of Higher Education, and QAA. 2010. Review of external examining arrangements in the UK: A discussion paper from Universities UK, Guild HE and the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. London: Universities UK.
73. Vaughan, C. 1991. Holistic assessment: What goes on in the rater's mind? In Assessing second language writing in academic contexts, ed. L. Hamp-Lyons, 111–25. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
74. Warren Piper, D. 1994. Are professors professional. London: Jessica Kingsley.
75. Watson, D. 2006. Who killed what in the quality wars. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency.
76. Wolf, A. 1995. Competence-based assessment. Buckingham: Open University Press.
77. Woolf, H., and A. Cooper. 1999. Benchmarking academic standards in history: An empirical exercise. Quality in Higher Education 5, no. 2: 145–54.
78. Yorke, M. 2008. Grading student achievement in higher education. London: Routledge.
79. Yorke, M. 2009. Faulty signals? Inadequacies of grading systems and a possible response. In Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education, ed. G. Joughin, 65–84. Dordrect, the Netherlands: Springer.
80. Yorke, M., P. Bridges, and H. Woolf. 2000. Mark distributions and marking practices in UK higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education 1, no. 1: 7–27.