Quality Handbook Section 9 - External examining requirements

2.1 Course teams, SASQCs, and the EEAP are guided by the following criteria when considering external examiner nominations:

1. An external examiner’s academic and / or professional qualifications, standing, expertise and experience should be appropriate to the course in terms of both level and subject. Academic or professional qualifications must equate to at least the level of the qualification being examined. Retirees may be considered if evidence of their continued involvement in the academic or professional area can be demonstrated.
2. An external examiner must have knowledge and understanding of UK sector agreed reference points for the maintenance of academic standards and the assurance and enhancement of student learning opportunities, e.g. the Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree Awarding Bodies (FHEQ), Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) Subject Benchmark Statements, etc.
3. An external examiner should have sufficient recent external examining or comparable related experience to indicate competence in assessing students in the subject. An external examiner may be appointed with no previous external examining experience provided they have sufficient internal examining experience or other relevant, recent experience or training. Where appropriate, the external examiner should join an experienced team or work initially alongside the current external examiner, or be subject to other special induction arrangements, for example, mentoring by an existing external examiner from a cognate course. The nomination form must include an appropriate supporting statement clarifying how inexperienced external examiners will be supported and/or mentored.
4. An external examiner must be fluent in English, and where appointed to courses delivered and / or assessed in languages other than English, they must be fluent in the relevant language(s).
5. The appointment should secure an appropriately balanced external examining team with complimentary expertise and experience that is able to cover the academic and / or professional subject content. The Executive Dean of School or Head of the Validated Centre has a duty to ensure that the appropriate number of external examiners are appointed to ensure adequate expertise is available to cover the major subject areas of the course and cope with the volume of student work.
6. Where a course is delivered and / or assessed in a language other than English and an external examiner with fluency in the relevant language(s) cannot be appointed, secured arrangements must be put in place to ensure that the appointed external examiner is provided with all necessary information in order to enable them to make their judgements.

2.2 It is advantageous to phase appointments within an external examining team. The induction of new external examiners and the effective liaison between outgoing and incoming external examiners should be regarded as complementary to the principle of phasing.

2.3 The following restrictions on appointments apply at the point of initial approval and throughout the external examiner’s tenure:

1. A external examiner must not be over-extended by the duties they are nominated to undertake. They should not concurrently hold more than the equivalent of two substantial external examiner appointments of taught provision, which includes the one they are being nominated to undertake. If the proposed external examiner appears to exceed this norm, the course team must provide a supporting statement explaining how the effects of this are to be mitigated.
2. An external examiner is expected to be impartial in judgment and should not have any direct current ties with the School, including any close professional, contractual or personal relationships with its staff or students, or have had any in the last three years. This includes substantive collaborative research activities with any member of staff within the School and external examining of PhD awards and phase 2 of Professional Doctorate courses located within the School. For Validation Service provision, an external examiner should not have any of these ties with the Validated Centre or the relevant link School.
3. A member of the Board of Governors or a committee of the University (or one of its collaborative partners) cannot be appointed as an external examiner. Additionally, a current employee of the University or one of its collaborative partners cannot be appointed as an external examiner.
4. A former NTU student or member of staff cannot be appointed as an external examiner unless a minimum of five years has elapsed before the intended date of appointment and all students taught with or by the nominee have completed their course(s).
5. An external examiner cannot be appointed if they will be required to assess colleagues who are recruited as students to the course.
6. An external examiner should not have acted as a consultant to the course team within the last three years. Prior to their appointment an external examiner may have been an external member of the University’s course design and approval process or validation panel established to approve the course, however following their appointment they may not be a member of a panel established to review the course.
7. No external examiner may be appointed if by doing so a reciprocal arrangement for external examining would arise involving cognate programmes of study at another institution.
8. An external examiner should not be replaced by an individual from the same institution / employer.
9. Except in very large examining teams, there should be no more than one external examiner from the same institution.
10. Where a course team wishes to appoint an external examiner from business, industry or the professions but the nominee does not have the necessary academic qualifications and experience to fulfil all of the criteria of appointment, an academic external examiner must also be appointed to the course. Depending on the nature of the course and the size of the cohort, this might be an existing academic external examiner from a cognate course.
11. In the exceptional case of examiners to be re-appointed, five years must have elapsed since the end of their previous tenure.
12. A more detailed statement of criteria for the appointment of external examiners can be found on the external examiner nomination forms.
13. Exceptions to the appointment criteria will only be approved by the EEAP where there are compelling reasons set out in the nomination form.

2.4 EQP maintains a register of external examiner appointments held by NTU staff, which Schools are required to formally update each academic year. It is the responsibility of the nominating School to ensure that a reciprocal arrangement is not created by the nomination of an external examiner to one of their courses. Validated Centres should keep a record of their own staff’s external examiner appointments to prevent the creation of reciprocal arrangements in the same way.

3.1 The standard period of appointment for an external examiner is four annual reporting cycles.

3.2 For courses operating to the standard academic year, appointments should run from the September of the first year to December of the fourth year, e.g. from September 2025 to December 2029. For courses that do not operate to the standard academic year, appointments should run from the standard intake date and cover any referral period.

3.3 Retrospective approval of external examiner appointments is not permissible. Where a nomination for an external examiner is approved after (or close to) the proposed start date on the nomination form, the EEAP will determine the actual start date of the appointment. This is to allow sufficient time for HR to undertake the required Right to Work check and issue a casual worker contract, which is a condition of the appointment.

3.4 An application to extend a period of appointment, or to add or reallocate duties, is considered according to the standard procedures using the separate nomination forms.

3.5 Extensions to the standard period of appointment are considered exceptional and any such requests must provide a strong rationale for doing so in the nomination form, for example, to cover the period of teach-out of a course.

4.1 EQP sends general briefing information  to each newly appointed external examiner via email as follows:

• a letter of appointment;
• a link to the external examining section of the Quality Handbook;
• a link to the assessment section of the Quality Handbook and the relevant Common Assessment Regulations (where appropriate);
• a link to the EQP induction webpages;
• a username and password to allow access to the online reporting system.

4.2 Each newly appointed external examiner is issued with a casual worker contract which they are required to sign and return to the University. In compliance with the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, the issuing of the casual worker contract and the commencement of tenure is subject to the external examiner undertaking a Right to Work check which will confirm whether or not the nominee is eligible to work in the UK. Following notification from EQP that an external examiner has been approved by the EEAP, HR liaises with the external examiner regarding these requirements. HR also make arrangements for the external examiner to be provided with credentials enabling access to NTU applications including the virtual learning environment (NOW) for remote access of student work.

4.3 Schools are responsible for inducting newly appointed external examiners. Induction for external examiners for Validation Service provision is organised by the Collaborations and Partnerships Team in EQP.

4.4 The School / Validated Centre is expected to brief and induct external examiners fully on all relevant aspects of the operation of the course and there is information on the University’s quality assurance frameworks and the role and responsibilities of an external examiner on the EQP webpages. The briefing should cover:

• the external examiner's responsibilities in relation to the course and, if relevant, the wider external examining team.
• details of any mentoring arrangements put in place.
• the conduct of the Board of Examiners meetings.
• the confirmed or anticipated dates for on-site visits to undertake the review of assessment samples.
• the confirmed or anticipated dates of the Board of Examiners meetings.
• School / Validated Centre policies in relation to notification of extenuating circumstances, academic integrity and decision making at the borderline.
• the requirements of any professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) or approved deviations from the assessment regulations which impact on the decision-making process.
• moderation procedures.
• course aims and learning outcomes, and those of the modules.
• assessment and teaching and learning strategies.
• assessment methods and marking scheme.
• assessment regulations including those for compensation.
• opportunities for reassessment.
• the extent of external examiners' discretion.
• standards and quality reporting arrangements.
• the University's requirements and conditions for awards as set out in the Quality Handbook.

4.5 Additionally, the following should be made clear:

1. University policy on equal opportunities and its commitment to an inclusive and positive environment.
2. the contractual arrangements - including fees and expenses, term of appointment, etc.

4.6 As a minimum, the external examiner should be provided with the following documentation:

1. a link to (or an export of) the definitive course and module information in CourseLoop.
2. the course handbook.
3. external examiner reports for the past three years.
4. a copy (or relevant parts) of the most recent Course Review Plan, or Annual course health check and development plan for Validation Service provision.

4.7 EQP periodically contacts existing external examiners to inform or consult with them about developments, as appropriate, in the University's academic standards and quality arrangements. The EQP website also acts as a source of guidance to external examiners.

4.8 The course team keeps the external examiner informed about appropriate developments to the definitive course and module information in CourseLoop.

5.1 The role of the external examiner is to consider:

1. whether the standards set for the course are appropriate for its awards, award elements or subjects, by reference to published QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ), the definitive course information (held in CourseLoop) and other relevant information.
2. the comparability of the standards with those of similar courses or parts of courses in other UK higher education providers.
3. the standards of student performance in the assessments for those courses or parts of courses to which they have been appointed to examine.
4. the extent to which the processes for assessment and the determination of awards are sound, have been fairly conducted and have supported the intended learning outcomes.
5. whether the action points in previous external examiner reports have been acted upon, and standards and quality thereby enhanced.
6. strengths and distinctive / innovative features in relation to academic standards, the operation of the assessment process and the quality of learning opportunities.

5.2 In order to perform these roles, the external examiner is party to the internal moderation process, normally sampling work that contributes to the final award, through:

1. Consideration, as requested, of the form and content of the assessment tasks that are used to assess students.
2. reviewing data related to student achievement at module and course level.
3. discussions with staff.
4. reviewing a sample of assessed work (the size of the sample should be agreed at the start of the course or module). A review of materials can be undertaken remotely as long as GDPR is adhered to at all times.
5. participation at the Board of Examiners meeting(s).
6. occasionally, and at the request of the course leader or the Chair of Board of Examiners, advising internal assessors on cases where they cannot agree marks (but not to arbitrate on differences).

Further information

• Schools with an Integrated Foundation Year (IFY) should determine whether external examiner oversight is required for that year, particularly where accreditation conditions or PSRB requirements specify whole-course or IFY-level review.

5.3 External examiners can undertake remote inspection of assessed work. This must be conducted electronically; hard copies of work must not be sent to external examiners to access assessments remotely in this way, on-site scrutiny must take place instead.

5.4 Assessment samples remain the property of the University, external examiners must not copy or download the student work. However, in instances where student work is only accessible by electronically downloading the material (e.g. video presentation), this would be permissible only upon the written commitment from the external examiner that they delete the file(s) immediately following their review; the arrangement for which should be managed by the School. Should any claim of a subsequent infringement of copyright be received from a student arising from such a review this will be referred to the relevant external examiner with the University accepting no liability in this regard.  Access for external examiners must be provided in such a way, so they are unable to add, amend or alter feedback given to students. If the School determines that this will not be achievable, the external examiner should review the work on-site.

5.5 The course leader must ensure that the opportunities are organised to allow an open discussion with the external examiner outside the Board of Examiners. Online exam boards and the remote accessing and reviewing of student assessments must not prevent such conversations. These opportunities may take place at a different time during the year when the examiner is able to visit the campus.  At this time, the external examiner should meet with the course team and current students, where possible.

5.6 External examiners do not act as second markers and should not be used to reconcile differences between internal markers.

Further information:

• The University's moderation policy provides indicative sample sizes (see Section 15 of the Quality Handbook).

5.7 Additionally, the external examiner is required to:

1. engage with the  induction for newly appointed external examiners.
2. provide feedback to SASQC, where requested, on the mapping exercise undertaken for proposed articulation agreements, including Advanced Standing Agreements, to confirm the match between the course at the partner institution and the University at the point of entry.
3. provide feedback on proposed modifications or changes to the courses to which they have been appointed to examine.
4. assume the role of a mentor, if required, for new external examiners who join the external examining team (or that of a cognate course) and who have no or limited previous external examining experience.  This may involve allowing the new external examiner to contact them should they require any guidance or advice concerning their role.
5. be present at a Board of Examiners meeting that agrees final awards (an external examiner need not attend progression boards). If exceptional circumstances result in the external examiner being absent from such a meeting, the external examiner should subsequently indicate by written notification – via the course leader – that they have been involved in the assessment process and agrees with the decisions made at the Board.  In the case of Referral Boards, at least one external examiner should be involved in the process but not necessarily through attendance.
6. sign the conferment statement to confirm that they have been involved in the assessment of students and agree with the final recommendations reached.
7. submit an annual report in the format prescribed by the University on the standards and quality of the course(s) and awards for which they are responsible. This report is used in the production of Course Review documentation (or Annual course health check and development plan for Validation Service provision) and for course enhancement generally.

Further information:

• Please note that Schools are transitioning to the new Course Review Policy in the 2025/26 academic year. For more information on this please see Section 6 and supplements.

5.8 At the conclusion of a Board of Examiners meeting, an external examiner should verbally raise any concerns or good practice that are likely to lead to action points in their annual report.

5.9 In order to carry out the preceding responsibilities, an external examiner may, by prior arrangement with the appropriate School or Validated Centre, meet groups of students to assist them to judge the overall quality and standards of the course(s). This does not give them the right to carry out viva voce examination of individual students.

6.1 The external examiner has a right to:

• be consulted in advance about proposed changes to course(s), particularly where they affect the course award(s), title(s), outcomes or the assessment scheme, major changes to modules or course closure. This allows the external examiner to comment on the changes from the perspective of their responsibilities.
• contribute to discussions on the moderation of marks and on decisions concerning marks and awards to individual students. However, the responsibility for moderation and for agreeing marks and awards rests with the Board of Examiners.

6.2 For some courses, there are subject and award external examiners. Subject external examiners exercise the above rights and responsibilities in relation to a number of modules in a subject area and are expected to attend Subject Boards to consider the results for all students taking the modules for which they have responsibility. Award external examiners exercise these responsibilities in relation to a named course or award. They are expected to attend the Award Board.

6.3 Under specific circumstances, an external examiner also has the following entitlements:

• The external examiner may report directly to the Vice-Chancellor on matters of major concern that pose a serious risk to the quality and standards of a University award, if serious issues are not satisfactorily addressed by the Executive Dean of School or Head of the Validated Centre (or nominee).
• If an external examiner continues to have serious concerns relating to the quality and standards of a University award and they have utilised all internal procedures, including reporting those concerns directly to the Vice-Chancellor, they have the right to invoke the QAA’s concerns scheme and / or inform the relevant professional, statutory or regulatory body (PSRB).
• In the event of an external examiner disagreeing with a recommendation for conferment, the matter should be decided by a vote of the Board of Examiners. If, following a vote, an external examiner does not support the majority decision the matter should be referred to Academic Board before the results are ratified. In such cases, the external examiner may withhold their signature from the conferment statement.
• If the external examiner has major concerns about the internal moderation of marks from the samples they receive, they have right of access to all student work that is assessed in their area of responsibility for the purposes of further monitoring and checking.
• The external examiner does not have the authority to alter individual marks. However, it may be appropriate for the external examiner to recommend a review of marks in a particular grade band.

7.1 The external examiner report covers academic standards, the operation of the assessment processes, the quality of learning, reflection on action taken on points raised in previous reports, and the operation of the external examining process, and within it the examiner is:

1. Required to reflect on the level and appropriateness of the assessment procedures and standards of student attainment in the light of his / her experience of the subject provision nationally.
2. Be invited to comment on strengths and distinctive or innovative features.
3. Be invited to include comments and observations, which the team may wish to respond to outside the rubric of the Course Review Plan and within a reasonable timeframe.
4. The report must be submitted via the University’s online reporting system within four weeks of the Board of Examiners meeting. The report is initially reviewed by EQP and then forwarded to the relevant School or Validated Centre (and link-School).

7.2 The report must be submitted via the University’s online reporting system within four weeks of the Board of Examiners meeting. The report is initially reviewed by EQP and then forwarded to the relevant School or Validated Centre (and link-School).

7.3 The reporting system can be accessed using the login and password details sent to each external examiner by EQP at the time of appointment.

7.4 An annual report is required for each year of the external examiner’s tenure. External examiners of new courses should still submit an annual report even when an award board has not taken place in a given academic year.

7.5 External examiner reports are published on the relevant course pages of NTU Online Workspace (NOW) alongside the course team’s response to the report(s). Validated Centres publish the reports and the course team’s response on their own webpages.

7.6 For courses that have multiple intakes and Board of Examiners meetings, the external examiner is only required to submit one annual report, unless agreed otherwise by the course leader and the external examiner. Where an external examiner is responsible for more than one course, the course team(s) should agree with them the number of reports they are required to submit.

7.7 External examiners are free to comment on any issues affecting student performance on which they see fit, however the report must not refer to individual students or staff members by name, nor should it contain any quantitative or qualitative data which could be used to identify individuals or groups of students within the cohort. Upon submission, EQP review all external examiner reports to ensure they comply with this requirement and liaise as appropriate with external examiners whose reports need to be amended.

7.8 A copy of the relevant sections of the Course Review Plan, or Annual course health check and development plan for Validation Service provision, is sent by the Schools / Validated Centres to the external examiner, this contains responses to the action points, and recommendations raised in external examiner reports. Comments relating to institutional issues and areas of good practice arising from external examiners’ reports are considered in an annual report that is considered by ASQC. Where appropriate, EQP responds to external examiners on behalf of ASQC.

7.9 Each year, EQP prepares one or more summary papers for ASQC providing an analysis of external examiner reports from across the institution. These reports include a summary of any negative responses to identified key quality indicator questions and the actions, which have been taken by the course team or institution in response to those comments.

7.10 In some cases, the course committee may wish to have more time to fully consider action points and recommendations, in which case those outcomes are reported in the next year of the Course Review Plan.

7.11 Schools / Validated Centres are responsible for informing relevant external professional bodies of action taken in response to external examiner reports.

8.1 The additional responsibilities of a chief external examiner are decided in conjunction with the course leader but are expected to include the following:

1. to confirm - by negotiation with other external examiners in the team - that a consistent and acceptable standard is being maintained across the course(s);
2. to coordinate the work of the team of external examiners and to liaise as appropriate with the course team(s);
3. to act as mentor for new and / or inexperienced external examiners;
4. to produce a summary report on behalf of the external examining team for the course.

10.1 An external examiner’s service may be discontinued by the University on the following grounds:

1. The examiner did not carry out properly the duties and responsibilities of the role.
   The examiner did not produce an adequate annual report.
2. The examiner displayed conduct contrary to that required and expected of a member of the NTU community.

10.2 The following are not grounds for discontinuation of service:

1. a difference of opinion about how the course should be run; or
2. perception that an external examiner is unreasonable in their professional opinions or overly critical of the course or course team.

10.3 The EEAP will consider a recommendation for discontinuation of service from the School or Validated Centre. Where the EEAP approves the recommendation, the external examiner will have 10 working days to respond to the concerns raised by the School or Centre. If the EEAP finds that the response does not satisfactorily address the concerns, then it will recommend a discontinuation of the external examiner’s service to ASQC.

10.4 If an unresolvable conflict of interest arises during an external examiner’s tenure, they would be expected to resign. As a last resort the University can discontinue the examiner’s service in line with the process outlined above.

10.5 If an external examiner intends to resign they should notify the course team as soon as possible to protect students on the course and the quality assurance arrangements associated with it. A resignation should normally take effect at the end of an academic year.

10.6 The University recognises that there will be instances in which an external examiner has to end an appointment early due to personal circumstances (e.g. serious illness) and there may be a delay in notifying the course team.

11.1 Payment of the fee is contingent on receipt of a satisfactorily completed external examiner report. The relevant School or link-School for Validation Service provision processes payment of the fee.

11.2 Claims for expenses should be submitted directly to the School or Validated Centre.