left to my own devices – occasional thoughts on higher education

The precise timing (indeed definition) is always up for grabs, but of course there is nothing as certain as the changing of the seasons.  And in UK higher education there is nothing as certain (while being less predictable than the seasons) as the periods of agonising over the effectiveness or otherwise of the external examining system.

Just off the top of my head, I can think of 1995’s Silver Report and the Finch Report of 2011; the debates that have led to multiple iterations of QAA requirements/expectations on external examining (2000; 2004; 2011); and HEFCE’s initiative in 2015 and 2016 that led to what is now AdvanceHE’s Professional Development Course for External Examiners as part of moves to strengthen the system.

coming around again

And now we’re here again.  As usually seems to be the case nowadays, the squall has been triggered by developments in England as it stems from last October’s Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper, which included in proposed OfS work on degree awarding powers [p.67]:

assessing the merits of the sector continuing to use the external examining system for ensuring rigorous standards in assessments. We will consider the extent to which recent patterns of improving grades can be explained by an erosion of standards, rather than improved teaching or assessment practices. We will also continue to build the evidence base on the effectiveness or otherwise of the external examining system

The general sector view was that this was both an odd inclusion, and one that came out of the blue.  That’s half right.  It was an odd inclusion.  But out of the blue?  Not really.

It was actually very clear where this came from.  When OfS jettisoned the UK Quality Code in its reform of its academic quality and standards conditions in 2021-22, external examining was expunged.  And at the same time senior figures from OfS were making it clear at sector meetings and briefings its desire to see the sector move away from external examining.  Which in turn prompted yet another publication, this time External Examining Principles (under the aegis of the UK Standing Committee for Quality Assurance) as the sector made clear its determination to hold on to external examining as a key element of assuring academic quality and standards.

So to see this issue in 2026’s White Paper should not have been a surprise to anyone.  There had been something in the air on this for a while.

As I observed at the time, one of the party games with white papers is trying to work out which elements will be implemented and endure, and which will disappear without a trace.  The lack of any public action to date on external examining suggests a better than even chance that this White Paper commitment falls into the latter category.  However, that remains to be seen, and the sector itself is using this as a prompt to reflect.

history repeating – why?

There are lots of important aspects of, and issues with, the external examining system that deserve thought and action.  I can’t help but think, however, that it’s worth taking a step back and think a little about why as a sector we repeatedly agonise over the system and its effectiveness.

One answer could be that the rise in the proportion of firsts and upper second awards in undergraduate degrees shows that the system simply doesn’t work.  That’s clearly the case to some extent, though I’ve written before about why I think this is a red herring, so I won’t do so again.  And I won’t ponder why everyone gets so agitated about undergraduate degree classification and appears not to care one not about classifications in taught postgraduate degrees.

Another is the small number of colleagues in the sector who view the external examiner budget as unnecessary cost.  And while it’s tempting to think that this is a result of the current financial pressures on the sector, my anecdotal experience is that even prior to 2020 there were a few senior colleagues who would, if they felt they could, have chosen to move the external examiner budget into other activities.

There is though a third reason, for which the sector perhaps needs to take responsibility.  And that is the tendency for higher education to overstate the role of external examining.

fortune – with implications

Universities are in a fortunate, perhaps even unique, position in the education sector.  We design our degrees; we deliver our degrees; and we assess and award our degrees.  This looks a little unusual to those outside the sector; literally marking our own homework.  And the sector is aware that this looks unusual, so that when it is challenged about academic standards it tends to default to references to the role of the external examiner.

And we overdo this, because the reality is that external examining forms just one part of the way we assure standards.  And by not emphasising the wider system of which external examining forms a part, we make it more vulnerable to criticism and attack; and in turn more difficult to hold on to something that offers value.

systems thinking

I remember a few years ago a PSRB with which I was connected employed a new quality manager, whose background was financial rather than academic regulation.  I was asked, and was happy, to arrange for this new quality manager to spend some time at my then university talking to a range of colleagues at multiple levels about how academic quality and standards were assured in the sector.

Unsurprisingly one of their key questions was how we were assured about academic standards, so we stepped them through the process.  Defining the learning outcomes to be assessed, and selecting modes of assessment linked to that; all subject to approval by the department and the faculty.  Developing assessment criteria aligned to these, again approved by the department.  Departmental approval of the specific examination paper/coursework assignment.  Moderation of first marking by a second marker.  Confirmation of marks by a board of examiners.  And finally consideration of the confirmed marks by a board of examiners.

In other words, a systematic process involving multiple professionals with expertise in the areas being assessed.  Yes including external expertise at important points (usually in the approval of specific assessment questions/titles; always in the confirmation and awarding processes).  But as part of a process designed to assure the integrity of standards.

the balance and the future

As a sector, I suspect that we have spent too little time emphasising this whole system approach; and too much loading all the weight for the credibility of our assessment and its outcomes on the role played by the external examiner.  When we talk about how we assure academic standards we need to articulate much more clearly the system as a whole.

So where does that leave external examining?

I can’t agree with those who advocate for the abandonment of external examining.  There are good reasons to hold on to something that continues to give value.  External examiners still provide a crucial role in the assessment system through the different, external perspective that they bring.  It reminds me of the Richie Benaud quote about captaincy in cricket, which he described as ‘90% luck and 10% skill; but don’t try it without that 10%’.  The integrity of our assessment and awards in universities is largely down to the robustness of the internal elements of our system; but we shouldn’t try it without the much smaller, but still crucial, external element.

It perhaps leads us leading to articulate more often and more clearly another systems perspective to the one set out above.  Over more than a decade, the sector has been moving towards a broader perspective on the role of externality.  Embedding external expertise in programme approval, monitoring and review.  Expanding its perspective on what constitutes valid externality (e.g. perspectives from industry).  Where we are now, and as is reflected in the UK Quality Code, is in effect an external expertise system that stretches throughout the programme lifecycle, where again external examining plays a crucial role but where it also just one element of the system of externality.

And if as a sector we can more frequently and effectively articulate and win the case for these broader systems perspectives, perhaps we may slow the frequency of our periods of agonising over external examining.  And hold on to the value we gain from external examining, while developing our approaches to build on this value.