Level 5: Examination Board

Safeguarding the quality of assessment means that as an Examination Board you have the responsibility to ensure that the assessments are of high quality (valid, reliable, and transparent) and that at the programme level, all assessments together cover all the Programme Intended Learning Outcomes which will guarantee that students who graduate deserve their diploma. Other bodies are responsible for assuring the quality of assessment: the programme director at the programme level and the examiner for the assessment at the course level.

Measures can be taken in advance, such as appointing competent examiners (one of your formal tasks) and verifying that examiners and teachers are adequately informed of important rules and guidelines regarding assessment construction and exam taking. Measures can also be taken afterward, such as stimulating examiners to execute a test analysis and evaluate the assessment process or – together with the programme director, establishing a systematic process to monitor the quality of assessment.

In addition, you need to check whether all Programme Intended Learning Outcomes of the programme are appropriately assessed by all the exams in the different courses of the programme.

To fulfil your role properly, you need to have a plan for how you will do these checks so you can safeguard the quality of assessment in your programme.

As an Examination Board you appoint the examiners in the programme, the teachers that administer the examinations and determine the results (Art 7.12.c WHW). As an Examination Board you should define what qualifications all examiners should have – often this is content expertise, assessment expertise (having a UTQ or the partial certificate Testing & Assessment or BKE) and probably also English proficiency.

Some Examination Boards allow teachers who have started their UTQ trajectory but have not finished yet, to act as an examiner. In these cases, it is advisable to consider whether extra measures should be in place. For instance, an experienced, qualified examiner being available to support the assessment process. This may also be advisable for a new teacher from outside the Netherlands and with a dispensation for the UTQ (due to having a similar qualification) but who is not yet familiar with the Dutch examination system.

Another consideration is how to deal with lecturers who are exempt from a UTQ, for example, because they have a very limited appointment, but who the programme director wants as an examiner. Special requirements could be set up for this situation, for example, the requirement to obtain a University Examination Qualification (Dutch: Basiskwalificatie Examinering) but not the entire UTQ, or the requirement could be that they always operate under the responsibility of a qualified examiner.

All examiners should be formally informed that they are appointed as examiners. In the formal letter, you can indicate for which course or subject they are appointed, the period and what procedures or rules they should adhere to, and where they can find the relevant information.

Safeguarding the organisation of assessment means that you check whether all procedures regarding the practical organisation of assessment are in place and well executed. The practical way of organising assessments is often laid down in so-called ‘protocols’, a standard way of working and a description of who has what role and what is expected of every party. An example is a protocol about how to organise and administer a written exam. As such, protocols can increase the efficiency of activities, ensure better coordination between those involved, provide clarity for new employees, prevent conflicts afterwards and help with quality control.

At UT, intsitutional protocols apply, provided by the Examination Office. The faculty or even the programme can have additional protocols regarding the organisation of assessment.

Your role as an Examination Board is to check whether relevant protocols are available, whether these protocols will ensure a smooth organisation of assessment and most of all whether all involved parties know about and comply with the rules and prescribed procedures.

Policy to guide the process

The thesis project has a special place in the programme, as it is the completion of the whole programme. It also receives special attention during an accreditation procedure.

To safeguard the quality of the organization of the thesis project, there must be a procedure on regarding who decides whether a thesis assignment is suitable, what criteria are to be used in this decision, and who can be a member of the thesis supervisory committee. In some programmes the Examination Board does this. In other programmes, this is executed by teachers from different departments or a thesis project coordinator. In all cases, it is important to ensure that assignments are appropriate for the student to demonstrate the required competencies and are feasible. A set of criteria can be used to guide the process.  

Assessment form quality and procedures to determine the grade

To safeguard the quality of the assessment of the thesis, a suitable assessment form should be in place, and a procedure for how the different members of the thesis committee come to a final grade. 

Safeguarding the quality of assessing theses  

To check whether everything works well, a so-called “theses carousel” can be organized. This can be done by the programme manager or director and/or the Examination Board.
A theses carousel encompasses a re-evaluation of the assessment results of a selection of theses. The new results are compared with the original results. A theses carousel can be used for different purposes, for instance, to check whether there is agreement on the grades given, to calibrate between assessors, and to investigate whether an assessment form provides sufficient guidance for assessors and does not lead to different interpretations.

Assessments are often followed by a verdict: a grade or a pass/fail judgment. As an Examination Board you can offer the examiners rules or guidelines about what they should do and take into account when they assess the work of students and determine the grades. This concerns, for example, directions on how the caesura is determined and how teachers arrive at a grade based on the score (= number of points for the test). For a written examination the following can be considered:

• how to decide on the caesura; what percentage of the total score means passing the examination? A caesura of 50% of the total score or 55% is often chosen, but who decides this? Can it be higher or lower?
• when an examiner uses a Multiple Choice examination, whether the guessing factor should be taken into account when calculating the caesura and grades.
• whether a test analysis should be executed before the grades are calculated, and how to deal with questions with severe flaws (e.g. all students gave an incorrect answer due to lack of clarity in the question, the question does not distinguish between students who do and those who do not understand the material).

The Examination Board determines Rules & Regulations in which they indicate how they implement all their tasks and powers (Art. 7.12b.3  WHW). The Rules & Regulations should include at least the following topics:

• a description of the way the board operates (composition, profiles for members, the way decisions are made, schedule for meetings, etc.);
• the mandates if applicable;
• procedures, rules and measurements regarding fraud;
• rules and criteria to grant exemptions for students (on request) from taking one or more exams;
• procedures and measurements for safeguarding the quality of exams and final examination;
• guidelines and instructions (within the framework of the EER) for marking and awarding results for interim and final examinations;
• procedures and criteria for assigning examiners. 

Every Examination Board should write an annual report in which its actions and decisions made in the past year is described. This annual report should be presented to, and preferably discussed with, the Dean of the faculty. In a yearly meeting with the Dean, the functioning of the Examination Board can be discussed, such as: whether the members of the Examination Board feel sufficiently qualified and supported to execute their tasks in an expert and independent manner. Also, problem areas that have been identified or concerns about the quality of assessment can be discussed, as well as improvement plans.

As the Examination Board deals with privacy-sensitive information, this annual report should be anonymized or on a more general level. For recommendations about the content of the annual report, see examples below.

When a student has completed the whole programme, the Examination Board awards a diploma to the student (according to Art. 7.11.2 WHW). This is done after CES, on behalf of the Executive Board, has checked whether the student has met all procedural demands.

The Examination Board adds a diploma supplement to the diploma, with additional information on the programme the student has executed (Art.  7.11.4 WHW). This supplement must meet certain requirements. For this, UT has a standard format.

Students' requests may include the following: to grant exemptions for one or more tests, additional resit for an test, following an individualized degree programme, and more. As an Examination Board, you have to decide on these requests according to your own Rules & Regulations while taking the special circumstances of the students into account.