The University of Leeds EXTERNAL EXAMINER'S REPORT ..., Study notes of Biochemistry

Download The University of Leeds EXTERNAL EXAMINER'S REPORT ... and more Study notes Biochemistry in PDF only on Docsity! Page 1 of 5 ExEx Report Form 2018-19 The University of Leeds EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S REPORT ACADEMIC YEAR: 2018-19 Part A: General Information Subject area and awards being examined Title and Name of Examiner: Faculty / School of: Faculty of Biological Sciences, School of Molecular and Cellular Biology Subject(s): Biochemistry / Medical Biochemistry Programme(s) / Module(s): BSc Biochemistry – all programme variants; BSc Biochemistry in Relation to Medicine: BSc Medical Biochemistry – all programme variants; MBiol, BSc Biochemistry (Integrated Masters) – all programme variants; MBiol, BSc Medical Biochemistry (Integrated Masters) – all programme variants; Awards (e.g. BA/BSc/MSc etc): BSc, MSc Part B: Comments for the Institution on the Examination Process and Standards Points of innovation and/or good practice Please highlight areas of innovation or good practice within the programmes or processes you have been involved with in this box. The Biochemistry degrees at Leeds are among the best in the country in terms of their content, relevance and delivery. Students are challenged from year 1 and are therefore well prepared for years 2, 3 and 4. Key to making these courses relevant is that the courses concentrate on fundamentals and principles rather than volume – there is far too much content for any student to fully grasp molecular science but by concentrating on the principles students are shown how to apply their knowledge to a broad range of problems. Students are also introduced to the main challenges of biochemistry and at the same time kept abreast of the latest techniques. As I stated last year, the teaching integrates the research of the department’s academics extremely well, such that in the final year students learn about research not only through project work but also in the advanced topics modules. This combination gives rise to extremely well- rounded students who not only learn detail on the subject but also gain insight into how such processes are discovered. Students who undertake the year in industry do exceptionally well. As with last year, I thought the examination papers contained a broad range of excellent questions that tested the knowledge of the students both fairly and proportionally. The scripts were extremely well marked and annotated clearly to help highlight both the good and the bad. The marking was very fair. There are some courses that have higher marks than others – and this probably needs to be looked at. Enhancements made from the previous year Please highlight any enhancements made to the programme(s) or processes over the past year in this box. In general, the process was much more professional than last year. Examiners were provided with a better room in which to look at scripts. There was much better communication between the academic and administrative sides. These improvements were greatly appreciated. Matters for Urgent Attention If there are any areas which you think require urgent attention before the programme is offered again please note them in this box I met with the students in May around the time of their project vivas. The final year students were generally satisfied with the way the course was run and particularly enjoyed the project work. However, there were a large number of second year students (~15) who were unhappy with aspects of their course, specifically to do with a practical module. As the students suggested that this was “messing with their mental health” I reported this straight away to the “Head of Department”. It is obviously important that staff interact with their students and course reps to ensure QAT received 08/10/19 Page 2 of 5 ExEx Report Form 2018-19 that this kind of situation is addressed at an early stage. I presume action has been taken to address the issues raised by the students. After the final examiners meeting in June, I was informed that mistakes had been made in the correlation of marks on a specific final year module. This effectively had the effect of adding between 6-10% to the exam paper and, significantly, moved several students up into the next boundary. This situation should not happen – and it should have been picked up by not only by the module convenor but also by myself when I was looking at the scripts. However, this year course marks were provided on a laptop and not on a spread-sheet, meaning that it was difficult to see how everything was calculated. Therefore, I recommend that processes are put in place to ensure that greater transparency is provided on the accumulation of marks for each individual module – and that separate spread sheets are provided for each module. This is obviously a serious issue and I trust it will be looked at closely. For Examiners in the first year of appointment only 1. Were you provided with an External Examiner Handbook? Y 2. Were you provided with copies of previous External Examiners’ reports and the School’s responses to these? Y 3. Were you provided with a External Examiner Mentor? NR For Examiners completing their term of appointment only 4. Have you observed improvements in the programme(s) over the period of your appointment? Y / N 5. Has the school responded to comments and recommendations you have made? Y / N 6. Where recommendations have not been implemented, did the school provide clear reasons for this? Y / N 7. Have you acted as an External Examiner Mentor? Y /N Please comment on your experience of the programme(s) over the period of your appointment, remarking in particular on changes from year to year and the progressive development and enhancement of the learning and teaching provision, on standards achieved, on marking and assessment and the procedures of the School Standards 8. Is the overall programme structure coherent and appropriate for the level of study? Y 9. Does the programme structure allow the programme aims and intended learning outcomes to be met? Y 10. Are the programme aims and intended learning outcomes commensurate with the level of award? Y 11. Did the Aims and ILOs meet the expectations of the national subject benchmark (where relevant)? Y 12. Is the programme(s) comparable with similar programmes at other institutions? Y Please use this box to explain your overall impression of the programme structure, design, aims and intended learning outcomes. 13. Is the influence of research on the curriculum and learning and teaching clear? Y Please explain how this is/could be achieved (examples might include: curriculum design informed by current research in the subject; practice informed by research; students undertaking research) 14. Does the programme form part of an Integrated PhD? N Please comment on the appropriateness of the programme as training for a PhD: 15. Does the programme include clinical practice components? N Please comment on the learning and assessment of practice components of the curriculum here: 16. Is the programme accredited by a Professional or Statutory Regulatory Body (PSRB)? N Please comment on the value of, and the programme’s ability to meet, PSRB requirements here: