Business and Creative Technologies

(1)

External Examiner’s Report Award and

Programme Title(s)

MA International Business & MA International Business and relevant exit awards at post graduate certificate and diploma levels;

Date of report June 2011

Academic year 2010/11 University School or Centre (include identity of any partner organisation(s))

Business and Creative Technologies

Instructions

Please complete the following template, typing your text into the box beneath each heading, as indicated. If any matters raised apply solely or particularly to any

collaborative provision encompassed by this report please ensure that this is clear and that you identify the partner institution(s) involved if it is not otherwise evident.

Received: 30 08 2011 Circulated: 20 09 2011

PART ONE : SUMMARY RESPONSE ON STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT 'In the view of the examiners, the standards set for the awards are appropriate for qualifications at this level, in this subject.'

Is the above statement correct (Yes/No)

The standards set for these awards are appropriate for the qualifications at this level and in the subjects for which I am involved.

If you have stated ‘no’, or if you wish to give additional information, please do so below. Marking:

Change mgt = 30 fail; 18 non sub; 31 pass (A=5, B=8, C=7, D=11) Strategy = 18 fail; 11 nonsub; 30 pass (A=1, B=10, C=13, D=6) BUY YOUR ESSAY.COM

Comparable standards applied to difficult range of abilities and diverse programmes; SAMPLE OF MBA4060 sent to me for review; phoned to confirm date and time of exam board for that module and told 22 June 2pm

NOTES - MBA4059 strategic management – all reports fail to follow the assignment brief; raises questions about the teaching support; lack of critical analysis; no word count shown on cover page; absence of data to support – for example ‘profitability is hight’ on p 6 of 1011143, but no numbers; missing criteria for scoring in PESTEL; ‘taxes – there are direct and indirect taxes; however no taxes for the sales made on internet; ‘deregulation of telecom under WTO as an opportunity – but the opportunities need detail; SWOT matrix – source and critical evaluation; 1012384 data analysis very weak – no cross tabs; no charts; drawing conclusions weakly; samples of excellent work completed by ptmba

(2)

might be sent to the tutor; what training is provided to tutors? Questions about entry requirements and admissions procedures for RAK? How do marks for these candidates on other modules compare with this module?

MBA4060 – ok no comment

Would like to see complete set of marks for each module to have a picture of the distribution of marks and how these compare module by module;

'In the view of the examiners the standards of student performance are comparable with similar programmes or subjects in other UK institutions with which they are familiar.' Is the above statement correct (Yes/No)

The standards of student performance with which I have been presented are comparable with similar programmes at other UK universities with which I am familiar.

If you have stated ‘no’, or if you wish to give additional information, please do so below.

'In the view of the examiners, the processes for assessment, examination and the determination of awards are sound and fairly conducted.'

Is the above statement correct (Yes/No)

I have observed that the processes for assessment, examination and the determination of awards are appropriate, sound and fairly conducted. There was a considerate discussion of each individual student where needed.

If you have stated ‘no’, or if you wish to give additional information, please do so below.

Where appropriate, a description or bullet point list of any particular strengths or

distinctive or innovative features in relation to standards and assessment processes, that would be worth drawing to the attention of external audiences.

The MSc Music and Creative Industries Management programme is unique and innovative.

I noted some teething problems related to integrating programmes delivered by partner institutions.

0

(3)

FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE PROGRAMME LEADER:

The issues and good practice raised in this report should be incorporated within the relevant Programme Quality Enhancement Plan (PQEP) and a copy of the plan sent to the External Examiner (with a covering letter) and (unless the PQEP is on QualTrack) to

[email protected] by the end of November.

Some good examples of feedback provided by tutors to students.

(4)

PART TWO: QUALITY OF PROVISION

This section of the Report will be used to give the Programme Team (including staff at any partner organisation) further feedback on the quality being achieved in the programme, the effectiveness of the assessment processes, the quality of the student learning experience and the quality of student achievement. Where responsibilities include collaborative provision please identify the partner organisation(s) involved. It would be useful if you could identify areas of good practice as well as issues for action. A. Academic Quality

Please give your views on the quality being achieved in the curriculum and the quality of provision being delivered, particularly curriculum content and teaching and learning strategies. Please indicate any specific action that you believe could be taken to enhance quality. If you feel that quality is at risk in any respect, please comment on any specific action that could be taken to address this.

PLEASE PROVIDE AN OVERALL RATING OF ACADEMIC QUALITY

Key: 1=Excellent 2=Highly satisfactory 3=Acceptable 4=Unsatisfactory 5=Very unsatisfactory

Rating 2 Please identify concisely below those major strengths and/or weaknesses (if any) in Academic Quality which in your view are sufficiently significant to warrant explicit attention, action and tracking by the appropriate part(s) of the University.

Significant Strengths

1. The Research Methods module provides a useful grounding for students to complete their final dissertation.

Significant Weaknesses 1. None observed.

Please use the space below for further explanatory comments and/or any additional points you wish to raise.

B. Assessment Processes

Please comment on the appropriateness of the assessments in assessing the learning outcomes of the units (including work-based learning where relevant), the reliability of internal marking procedures and the effectiveness of the moderation processes.

PLEASE PROVIDE AN OVERALL RATING OF ASSESSMENT PROCESSES

Rating 2 Please identify concisely below those major strengths and/or weaknesses (if any) in Assessment Processes which in your view are sufficiently significant to warrant explicit attention, action and tracking by the appropriate part(s) of the University. Significant Strengths

1. Staff working to devise assessments that enable students from a number of different cultures to demonstrate they have met the learning outcomes.

(5)

Significant Weaknesses 1. None observed

C. Quality of Student Learning Experience

On the evidence available to you, please give your views on the quality of the students' learning experience, including provision of student support and guidance and teaching and learning resources, indicating whether you have had the opportunity to meet students.

PLEASE PROVIDE AN OVERALL RATING OF STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCE

Rating 2 Please identify concisely below those major strengths and/or weaknesses (if any) in the Student Learning Experience which in your view are sufficiently significant to warrant explicit attention, action and tracking by the appropriate part(s) of the University. Significant Strengths

1. Students appear to have good support and guidance from highly skilled teachers.

Significant Weaknesses

1. Standards at partner institutions are hard to verify.

D. Student Achievement

Please comment on the overall quality of performance being achieved by students. PLEASE PROVIDE AN OVERALL RATING OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

Rating 2

Please identify concisely below those major strengths and/or weaknesses (if any) in Student Achievement which in your view are sufficiently significant to warrant explicit attention, action and tracking by the appropriate part(s) of the University.

Significant Strengths

1. Use of marks across the range demonstrate the ability of staff to distinguish between different standards of performance.

Significant Weaknesses

1. A large proportion of poor marks observed. This may be due to admissions standards that could be raised to eliminate poor performers.

(6)

E. Do you have any additional comments about programme quality (other than any covered previously in this report), including good practice, which you particularly wish to note?

No additional comments.

F. Are you satisfied that any previous comments made by you as External Examiner have been noted and responded to?

YES NO N/A

Comments:

FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE PROGRAMME LEADER:

The issues and good practice raised in this report should be incorporated within the relevant Programme Quality Enhancement Plan (PQEP) and a copy of the plan sent to the External Examiner (with a covering letter) and (unless the PQEP is on QualTrack) to

[email protected] by the end of November.