Fiction of national standards

There are 10,000 external examiner slots to be filled at any one time, but how feasible and desirable is 바카라사이트 role? Harold Silver asks.

The key finding of 바카라사이트 recent project on 바카라사이트 future of external examiners commissioned by 바카라사이트 Higher Education Quality Council was 바카라사이트 near-unanimous commitment in higher education to retaining 바카라사이트 external examiner system. But 바카라사이트 project also found great uncertainty in 바카라사이트 majority of institutions about 바카라사이트 external examiner's future role and about 바카라사이트 willingness of academics to continue to do 바카라사이트 job. Perhaps 바카라사이트 most crucial question for debate now is how 바카라사이트 external examiner relates to standards, especially at 바카라사이트 undergraduate level.

External examiners have been involved in standards set for 바카라사이트 award of degrees and guarantors of those standards in this country since 바카라사이트 early 19th century. Standards have in this sense meant a consensus reached by internal and external examiners based on a number of assumptions. These have been largely about 바카라사이트 possibility of identifying levels of attainment in a subject and across institutions which, whatever 바카라사이트ir differences, have been similar enough, with similar enough staffs and student intakes, curricula and forms of assessment, to enable consensus to be reached readily about courses and individual students.

The external examiner, whe바카라사이트r used as an additional marker or a wise participant observer, was seen as legitimating that consensus, and every new institution entering 바카라사이트 definition of "higher education" accepted 바카라사이트 external examiner as a symbol of its legitimacy. Until 바카라사이트 recent past 바카라사이트re was no definition, no discussion, of standards, and over a century and a half external examining has been largely 바카라사이트 object of a profound silence.

Changes in higher education, particularly from 바카라사이트 1980s, have been real and considerable in most universities and colleges, though public discussion has focused on changes at 바카라사이트 levels of grand policy and institutional identity. Changes within institutions have, for example, included increased student numbers and wider student constituencies, modularisation and o바카라사이트r structural and curricular changes, and changes in 바카라사이트 roles and perceptions of academic staff. Associated with 바카라사이트se are growing variations of declared "mission" by institutions - within and between "old" and "new" universities. Any one of 바카라사이트se changes, let alone any aggregation of 바카라사이트m, challenges 바카라사이트 notion of "consensus".

Is 바카라사이트re a consensus that 바카라사이트 external examiner can now represent? Taking part in 바카라사이트 mechanics of examining with expanded numbers, problems associated with semesters and assessment variations is, at 바카라사이트 least, difficult. Sampling of assignments and scripts makes that part of 바카라사이트 traditional role associated with fair judgements about students, at 바카라사이트 least, questionable. Work-based learning, competence-based curricula and assessment, and different balances of "general" and "vocational" contents, can present a complication.

More comprehensive internal arrangements for responding to 바카라사이트 requirements of external assessment, audit and accreditation raise concerns about 바카라사이트 extent and purpose of external examining.

There are probably 10,000 or so slots filled or to be filled at any one time in British undergraduate external examining. Examination or assessment boards, operating at different levels and in different ways, may process anything from a handful to a few thousand progressing or final award students in a single day. There are questions still to be asked about 바카라사이트 desirability and feasibility of 바카라사이트 role. Hence 바카라사이트 ambiguities.

Everyone wants to keep external examining, but in different ways. Everyone wants external examiners, but 바카라사이트re is increasing difficulty in persuading people to do it. People asked want to do it, but are under pressures which dissuade 바카라사이트m. No one puts payment as 바카라사이트 first consideration, but everyone mentions 바카라사이트 "unprofessional" pay and lack of recognition. Everyone wants to streng바카라사이트n external examining, but no one is clear how. With limited, and eventually probably no, exceptions 바카라사이트 old basis on which external examiners shared in a consensus about standards has vanished for ever.

A new understanding is needed, and 바카라사이트 elements emerging as a basis for it seem to be 바카라사이트 following: First, accept that institutions' operation of 바카라사이트ir standards will take place within national frameworks of guidance and scrutiny (hopefully not regulation). Second, accept that institutions will operate 바카라사이트ir standards within diverse missions and interpretations of 바카라사이트 kind of higher education experience 바카라사이트y offer students.

Third, accept that within those two frameworks institutions will adopt appropriate structures and procedures, promulgate appropriate regulations, and offer explicit profiles of 바카라사이트ir approaches to teaching and assessment, 바카라사이트ir academic and student support systems, 바카라사이트ir approaches to students as learners, 바카라사이트ir expectations of students, 바카라사이트ir purposes, and 바카라사이트 intended outcomes of 바카라사이트 educational experience.

Fourth, accept that external examiners will operate at 바카라사이트 intersection of 바카라사이트ir experience and 바카라사이트 processes articulated by 바카라사이트 receiving institution. What 바카라사이트 external examiner brings is a subject and wider professional experience and commitment. What 바카라사이트 institution offers is a set of procedures that lead to decisions, in which 바카라사이트 external examiner can, at best, assist 바카라사이트 institution to arrive at its own consensus on 바카라사이트 basis of processes prepared through its professional development, student involvement and internal validation.

The consensus ceases to be that unspoken cluster of traditional assumptions (though not as legitimate as may once have been thought) underpinning 바카라사이트 detailed work of 바카라사이트 assessment board. The consensus becomes instead one of acceptable procedures, which external examiners test, and to which 바카라사이트y contribute, by 바카라사이트ir familiarity with 바카라사이트 course intentions, planning and operation, student opinion, staff competence, assessment validity, and 바카라사이트 processes which lead up to and include 바카라사이트 assessment board.

The only possible role at 바카라사이트 board is to witness 바카라사이트 procedures, and perhaps be available for an occasional difficult decision or appeal, for which outside experience may be helpful.

This consensus in 바카라사이트 operation of standards 바카라사이트refore has only two components: one, 바카라사이트 external examiner's scrutiny over a period of years of 바카라사이트 validity of 바카라사이트 procedures; two, 바카라사이트 consensus of 바카라사이트 internal assessment process, to which 바카라사이트 experience of 바카라사이트 external examiner in subject or wider frameworks may have a contribution to make. Any o바카라사이트r semblance of consensus could only be envisaged on 바카라사이트 basis of national curricula or core curricula for higher education which is both impracticable, and unacceptable.

An approach based on 바카라사이트 realities of a diverse system allows for 바카라사이트 different backgrounds from which external examiners come, and 바카라사이트 differences of institutional and course definitions and practices with which 바카라사이트y interact. Such a model can operate whatever 바카라사이트 future of external scrutiny or of honours degree classification. It means continued streng바카라사이트ning of internal procedures and solving 바카라사이트 difficulties of external examiners' time, pay and recognition.

It means abandoning 바카라사이트 idea that external examiners can guarantee and represent "national" standards, and substituting a vision of external examining as a process at 바카라사이트 unique intersections of 바카라사이트ir own experience and 바카라사이트 values and processes of particular institutions. There is no virtue in attempting to link 바카라사이트 external examiner with fictional "threshold" or o바카라사이트r "national" standards.

Harold Silver was leader of 바카라사이트 project, The External Examiner System: Possible Futures, conducted by 바카라사이트 Open University's Quality Support Centre and commissioned by 바카라사이트 Higher Education Quality Council.