DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY
MINUTES OF EXAMINATION/TEACHING COMMITTEE MEETING
HELD ON TUESDAY 14 SEPTEMBER 2015 AT 14.00 IN THE WILLIAMSON ROOMS
Present: Gonzalo Blanco, Nia Bryant, Colin Beale, Leo Caves, Calvin Dytham, Gareth Evans,
Adrian Harrison, Mike Haydon, Harv Isaacs, Louise Jones, James Moir, Michael
Plevin, Emma Rand, Daniel Ungar, Marjan van der woude, Richard Waites, Jenny
White
Apologies: Darren Goffin
15/001 Minutes of last meeting:
Were approved noting the following matters arising:
(i) Module reports had been made available to all staff
(ii) BIO00001I Biochemical skills 2, changes will be introduced this year, but the module was mentioned by the external examiner again this and those comments will be addressed later in the meeting;
(iii) Proposed changes were made to the Comprehension papers;
(iv) Changes were implemented to the Open essay paper and they take effect from
September 2015
(v) The comments on the problem questions were acted on and the externals did not have many queries this year – the papers were more even;
(vi) Stage 2 review is ongoing and will be discussed at the next meeting of Teaching
Committee
(vii) Project marking criteria and the marksheet were updated;
(viii) E-assessments had been discussed; open assessment submissions via the VLE were being encouraged but there has not been much progress with computer based closed examinations and no current open assessments are marked electronically by
VLE. Richard Waites, Katie Smith and Pen Holland were looking into University developments in e learning, Departments need to lobby the University to improve the current software and look at the new VLE tender. For electronic marking to be successful staff need to be happy with increased computer time, currently many do not mark at their desk. We are considering VLE assessment submissions for the spring term practical modules in BIO00032I Scientific skills.
(ix) Louise Jones commented that the Assessments review had resulted in a reduction of some stage 2 examination durations to achieve parity of weighting across open/closed components and across modules. Some open assessments have been introduced in stage 3 but this is an ongoing process.
15/002 Examiners reports and Departmental response
Lorraine Maltby
Professor Maltby identified stage 3 ecology choices as an issue – particularly for integrated masters students, this was being looked at by the Biology Programme Committee.
ALJ/JAL Examinations/Teaching Committee minutes September 2015

She liked the problem based questions in stages 2 and 3 but has concerns that the short answer questions are not discriminating enough and rely too heavily on factual recall and that they are not suitable in final year papers. She felt that the level at which the questions were pitched could potentially lead to grade inflation.
Examinations Committee believe there is a place for factual recall questions at this level as students do have to demonstrate some knowledge but the questions have to test core concepts and should involve reflection. Staff need to be reminded of this. It is reasonable to expect that some students may only have a basic understanding of the module material and they need to be able to demonstrate this – short answers are ideal here. The examination has to assess all the stated learning outcomes and short answers can be useful for assessing material across a module.
Examinations Committee feel that the standard of short answers has improved and we are moving away from this type of question but they see no reason to remove them for the examination papers at present.
The other examiners were more positive about the short answer questions and feel we have a good mix.
Professor Maltby suggested the Department may wish to consider second marking stage 2 essays; the Committee did not think this was necessary but agreed that a cross-section should be reviewed, perhaps by module organsisers
Professor Maltby commended the second marking of projects and final year essays but had picked up on a couple of instances where staff were not following the published guidelines.
She suggested that changing the wording on the project disagreement form could help with this.
Professor Maltby (and the other examiners) had commented on the high percentage of 1 st class marks awarded; she felt the excellence criteria in the marking criteria may be responsible for this as it carries a strong emphasis on giving firsts. The Department does need to monitor this, but comparing our results with those of other Russell Group
Universities suggests that we are slightly below the mid-table position for good degrees.
Action: Louise Jones/Module organisers
Julie Gray
Professor Gray queried if the stage 1 papers are too easy. We need to review the content in
Genetics and Microbiology and ensure that the questions set are sufficiently challenging.
We need to consider if the taught material is pitched at right level? Perhaps the assessments are too predictable? In genetics the students are very well prepared through the problem sessions.
The examiner recommended that we review first class marks and only moderate in exceptional circumstances.
Action: Louise Jones / Daniela Barilla
ALJ/JAL Examinations/Teaching Committee minutes September 2015

Andrew Jarman
The examiner was very complimentary specifically about the Advanced Topics in
Developmental Biology module. He was pleased to see project word limit had been reduced.
Frank Sargent
The examiner made a number of specific comments on individual modules: Biochemical skills II, Molecular machines and Biocatalysis. He recommended we review the content of
Molecular machines and this is currently being discussed with the relevant staff. He noted that Biocatalysis had been moderated two years running, which suggests the assessment and learning outcomes are not aligned. He noted that in Biochemical skills II the students do not perform well in the examination and he suggested introducing an open book workshop / exam. The Committee noted that the weighting and workload of Biochemical skills II remain slightly out of line with Biology stage 2 skills and that changes would need to be implemented for 2015/16.
Action: Christoph Baumann, Neil Bruce
15/003 Double marking
James Moir presented a paper suggesting a move away from double marking of final year essays and instead employing a moderator who samples scripts to view if marking appropriate – this would save marking time which could be spent providing improved feedback
The Committee expressed concerns that some students could be disadvantaged if second marking is lost because we are not accurate at marking essays and the marking is very variable. Cannot we not improve the feedback anyway, will moderation really reduce workloads that much. Need to distinguish comments for markers from comments for students to improve. Maybe retain 2 nd marking but 2ns marker sees suggested mark from
1 st marker, 2 nd marker used to measure consistency. Need to be clear on what the characteristics of good feedback are
15/004 Marking application
Colin Beale looked at project marking and project disagreements in particular; most of the projects with large disagreements are those at the top and bottom of the marking scale. He developed a marking app that may help staff with their marking in these areas. He agreed to develop the app for use with the placement project marking in the autumn term.
Action: Colin Beale
15/005 NSS views on assessment and feedback
The Committee discussed the changes that have been/could be introduced that should help improve feedback scores:
ALJ/JAL Examinations/Teaching Committee minutes September 2015

(i) open essay will be in autumn term and students should get good feedback on this,
(ii) develop marking grid aligned to marking criteria and grade descriptors that staff have to complete;
(iii) produce guidelines for writing good feedback
(iv) Survey the students on what they consider good feedback to be, embed value of feedback and get students to reflect on the feedback they are given. Highlight in welcome back meetings and skills lectures;
(v) Produce feedback sheets for open essay and January assessments that should be discussed with supervisors in a mid-spring term supervisory meeting to discuss progress and feedback;
(vi) Project feedback – re-emphasise to students what is required to obtain 1 st and 2I marks. Richard Waites and James Moir agreed to review the current guidelines on feedback on drafts of project reports to ensure all students get some feedback on their project work.
(vii) Introduce module specific feedback sessions at the end of the relevant examination session.
Action: Richard Waites/James Moir/Teaching Committee for discussion
15/006 Criteria for assessing m level projects
Comments on the tabled document to be sent to James Moir for the end of September.
15/007 Module assessment information
Louise Jones informed the Committee that the Assessed practical forms would no longer be produced; all assessment information for a module would be contained in an assessment tab on the VLE module site. Examinations Committee would also be checking all open assessments this year, a sub-committee will be set up to manage this.
Action: James Moir agreed to check the deadlines for submission of open assessments.
Examinations Committee
15/008 Open assessments in stage 3
The Committee agreed they would like to increase the diversity of assessment in stage 3.
Three open assessments were being introduced this year but they would like this to increase. From 2016/17 a 10% weighting threshold will be introduced for individual pieces of assessed work.
Action: Board of Studies to approve
15/009 Learning outcomes and assessments
The Committee noted that it would become a large administrative burden if examinations committee have to check if assessments are aligned to the module learning outcomes.
Perhaps ask for learning objectives for modules that are known to have issues and check these. James Moir felt question setters should be able to identify the learning outcome /s
ALJ/JAL Examinations/Teaching Committee minutes September 2015

reflected in each of their examination questions. The Committee agreed that module organisers should be responsible for making sure this is in place, to be introduced from
2016/17.
Action: Module organisers
ALJ/JAL Examinations/Teaching Committee minutes September 2015