faculty of behavioural, management and social … report...2019/12/16 · 1 faculty of behavioural,...

1

Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences (BMS)

Examination Boards Annual Report Academic year 2018-2019

BMS-CoC-2019-1080

In a Constructive Dialogue with Programme Directors and the Faculty Board

2

Table of Contents 1. Foreword from the Chairs ............................................................................................................ 3

2. Tasks, composition and work procedures ................................................................................... 5

3. Degrees awarded .......................................................................................................................... 9

4. Safeguarding Assessment Quality .............................................................................................. 15

5. Accreditation of the study programmes .................................................................................... 18

6. Decisions on individual student requests .................................................................................. 19

7. Fraud cases .................................................................................................................................. 20

8. Appeals and Complaints ............................................................................................................. 22

9. Reflection 2018-2019 and main focal points for 2019-2020 and further .................................. 24

Response letter from Vice-Dean on Education to the Annual Report 2017-2018 .............................. 25

Appendix A: Historical data per programme – examination board Behavioural Sciences ................ 27

Appendix B: Historical data per programme – examination board Governance Sciences ................. 33

Appendix C: Historical data per programme – examination board Interdisciplinary Sciences ......... 39

Appendix D: Historical data per programme – examination board Management Sciences .............. 42

3

1. Foreword from the Chairs This annual report of the Examination Boards (EBs) of the Faculty BMS provides an overview of the actions undertaken by them in the 2018-2019 academic year. It describes the scope, content and results of the work that has been carried out by each Examination Board.

From the report 2017-2018 to 2018-2019: in a dialogue with the Board of the Faculty BMS

The previous annual report (2017-2018) was discussed by the BMS Faculty Board in March 2019, and with the Faculty Council in June 2019. In 2017-2018 the Examination Boards set six main improvement areas as targets for 2018-2019 and beyond (see 2017-2018 Annual Report, p. 23):

• Adequate and timely administration of appointments of Examination Boards members. • Examination Boards (EBs) and programme directors (PDs) experienced challenges with appointing

examiners due to the lack of a standard template for an appointment letter and a uniform appointment process.

• Holding meetings with examiners by EB-MS and EB-BS was seen as valuable, constructive and informative. Such meetings were advised to be considered by all EBs at BMS.

• Safeguarding assessment quality is at the core of the legal responsibility of EBs. In 2017-2018, two EBs (BS and MS) made agreements with their PDs for regular screening of the study units. The Examination Boards should discuss solutions with PDs to continuously keep on screening the tests, as it is beyond the capacity of CELT. At the same time, the Examination Boards called for extra resources to ensure timely screening of the tests.

• From the report on the number of fraud cases, evident differences were noted between the EBs. Therefore, the Examination Boards agreed to write BMS-wide guidelines for more uniform fraud prevention practices.

• Deficiency of manpower at the registrar office due to the long-term illness of the Executive Secretary. We have asked the BMS Faculty Board to remedy this unfortunate situation.

The response letter from the Board of the Faculty BMS, signed by the Vice-Dean on Education on behalf of the Dean (p.24). Overall, the Faculty Board expressed its appreciation for the clear overview provided in the 2017-2018 Annual Report, and its positive opinions about 1) the independent way of working of each Examination Board at BMS, and the contribution of the Chamber of Chairs as a coordinating and synchronizing entity; 2) the progress that has been made with respect to the safeguarding of the Assessment Quality; 3) regular meetings between the Examination Boards and the program directors; 4) biannual meetings of some Examination Boards with examiners and teachers within their programmes.

Examination Boards: in 2018 - 2019, we continued with these good practices, and all Examination Boards engaged in regular meetings with teachers.

For 2018-2019, regarding the capacity for assessment screening of study units, the Faculty Board suggested a step-wise approach: 1) investigate the time required for various forms of screening; 2) investigate possibilities for ‘lighter’ versions of screening that are less time-consuming that the current practice but still provide sufficient confidence in the quality of screening; 3) based on the first two steps, increase the screening capacity.

Examination Boards: The Examination Boards of Behavioural Sciences and Management Sciences started a dialogue with their Programme Directors about alternative (less time-consuming) screening procedures of assessment quality at the study units (SAQ Protocol). This type of screening is already being practised by the PSTS programme. At the same time, they observed that these alternative screening procedures showed little progress in 2018-2019. Examination Boards voiced a sense of urgency towards the Faculty Board and Programme Directors to finalize procedures for Assessment Quality screening at the level of individual study units in 2019-2020. Failure to achieve this would put at risk the execution of legal responsibilities by the Examination Boards.

4

The Faculty Board observed consistency in the types and frequency of student requests (except for a notable decrease in the request for a free (individual) degree program). The Faculty Board advised monitoring this achieved stability carefully after the introduction of TOM 2.0. It also agreed that the capacity of the registry has been lower than required in the past year (due to external circumstances) and decided to recruit an executive secretary.

Examination Boards: regarding TOM 2.0, the Examination Boards will carefully monitor student requests statistics.

The Faculty Board committed to carrying out careful administration for the appointment of the members of Examination Boards. It supported the suggestion of sending annual re-appointment letters to examiners by using more efficient and standardized IT solutions. Regarding the remarkable differences between Examination Boards in the number of fraud cases, it welcomed the initiative taken by the Examination Boards to investigate further into how to explain these differences and which relevant variables are responsible for them.

Examination Boards: in 2018-2019, substantial progress was made in appointing examiners in a structured way. For 2019-2020, however, the issue remains of designing a database that would streamline this process further. The Examination Boards did not produce the promised guidelines about fraud prevention for examiners and teachers. With the appointment of the new Executive Secretary, we hope to finalise this in 2019-2020.

In 2018-2019, the four Examination Boards continued to formally operate independently from one another, but with regular meetings of the Chairs in the Chamber of Chairs, to exchange information, share best practices, and work on joint action points. We distinguish seven main action points for the 2019-2020 academic year:

November 2019

Prof. Tanya Bondarouk; Chair, Examination Board Management Sciences

Prof.dr. Mieke Boon; Chair, Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences

Dr. Ringo Ossewaarde; Chair, Examination Board Governance Sciences

Dr. Marcel Pieterse; Chair, Examination Board Behavioural Sciences

1. Examination Boards call for urgent action to finalise the processes (policies and practices) of tests for screening the study units across all study programmes at BMS. 2. Examination Boards will repeatedly ask the Faculty Board to design the database to automate the appointment of examiners. 3. Examination Boards will develop guidelines for examiners and teachers about fraud prevention and dealing with fraud. 4. All Examination Boards at BMS need to establish and institutionalise practices on monitoring mandates given to programme directors for a number of decisions (they are all listed in Rules&Guidelines). 5. All Examination Boards at BMS will re-start the tradition of writing newsletters with the purpose to share EB news and best practices. 6. Regarding Safeguarding the quality of test organization, the Examination Boards have sent the request to the Dean to invest more in digital testing. They observed that the digital environment for written individual tests is still fragile, and depends on the Remindo provider. We ask the Faculty Board to consider measures (together with the CES) to prevent technical difficulties during digital tests. 7. We continue our work on Safeguarding Assessment Quality, based on the SAQ protocol, and in a close and constructive dialogue with the Faculty Board and Programme Directors.

5

2. Tasks, composition and work procedures Tasks (the same as in the 2017-2018 Report)

The tasks of the Examination Board are described in the Higher Education and Scientific Research Act (Wet op het hoger onderwijs en wetenschappelijk onderzoek, WHW). This Act stipulates (art. 7.12, par. 2, WHW) that the Examination Board is the body that objectively and professionally assesses whether a student meets the conditions as described in the Education and Examination Regulations (EER) with regard to the knowledge, insight and skills required to obtain a degree.

To this end, the Examination Board BMS awards degree certificates and diploma supplements, appoints examiners, safeguards assessment quality, decides on students’ requests for exemptions to the EER, grants permission to students to take a free (elective) programme, establishes rules and regulations for assessment, and takes disciplinary action in case of fraud. The Examination Board also advises the Dean about the EER (and any necessary amendments).

The scope of the Examination Boards BMS regarding assessment quality concerns 6 bachelor degree programmes and 14 master degree programmes. Each Examination Board is assigned three to six programmes that most logically form a cluster. The composition of the Examination Boards and the programmes that fall under their jurisdiction are listed in the next section.

Composition of the Examination Boards

Within each Board, the members jointly carry out responsibilities and tasks, while each member is also specifically responsible for one of the degree programmes involved. In accordance with article 7.12a par. 3 WHW, an external member is appointed on each Board. In the 2017-2018 academic year, two external members, both specialists in assessment quality, were appointed to two Examination Boards (Table 2). Table 1 provides an overview of the support of the Examination Boards.

Period (from) Person(s) involved 01-09-2018 - 31-12-2018

BMS has three registrars: Van Dijken (25 h/w) for MS, Peijster-Terpelle (32 h/w) for BS, Vollenbroek-Timmerhuis (40 h/w) for IS, GS and BIT until December 2018

31-12-2018 Executive Secretary The secondment from Saxion was terminated because of a long-lasting illness of the executive secretary Biekart-Wijers

01-01-2019 Registrars The tasks of the Executive Secretary to support safeguarding the meetings IBA/BA and IEMs/IEM were taken over by Van Dijken. Other tasks, e.g. the Annual Report, teachers’ manual or invigilators’ manual were picked up in cooperation by all registrars. There is a vacancy for this position.

01-01-2019 Registrar Vollenbroek-Timmerhuis decreased her number of working hours from 38 to 20 and works only for the EB BiT because of her pre-pension

01-01-2019 Registrar Vollenbroek-Timmerhuis was assisted by a temporary worker from Randstad for the EB’s IS and GS pending replacement for these EBs IS and GS

01-03-2019 Registrar Tijhuis was appointed as the new registrar.

Table 1. Support of Examination Boards BMS

6

EB Name Appointment period Degree Programme Behavioural Sciences

Dr. M.E. (Marcel) Pieterse (chair) 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 BSc Psychology (PSY) Dr. S. (Sven) Zebel 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 MSc Psychology (MPS) Dr. J. (Judith) ter Vrugte 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 BSc Educational Science (OWK)

MSc Educational Science and Technology (EST) Dr. S. Janssen 01-09-2018 till 30-04-2019 MSc Communication Studies (M-COM)

Dr. J. (Joyce) Karreman 01-05-2019 till 01-09-2020 MSc Communication Studies (M-COM) Dr. J.J. (Joris) van Hoof 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 BSc Communication Science (B-COM) P.M.M. (Paul) Schunselaar (Saxion) 01-09-2018 (contract) External member (assessment quality)

Governance Sciences

Dr. M.R.R. (Ringo) Ossewaarde (chair) 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 BSc European Public Administration (EPA) Prof.dr. R. (Ramses) Wessel 01-05-2018 till 01-05-2020 MSc Public Administration (PA) Dr. M. (Martin) Rosema 01-07-2017 till 01-07-2021 MSc European Studies (ES) Dr. V.I. (Victoria) Daskalova, LLM 01-04-2018 till 01-09-2020 Master Risk Management (MRM)

Master Public Management (MPM) Master of Environmental and Energy Management (MEEM)

P.M.M. (Paul) Schunselaar (Saxion) 01-09-2018 (contract) External member (assessment quality) Interdisciplinary Sciences

Prof.dr. M. (Mieke) Boon (chair) 01-03-2018 till 01-03-2020 MSc Philosophy of Science, Technology and Society (PSTS) Dr. P. (Peter) Stegmaier 01-09-2018 till 01-09-2020 MSc Philosophy of Science, Technology and Society (PSTS) Dr. M. (Michiel) Waltman 17-09-2018 till 31-08-2020 MSc Educatie in de Mens- en Maatschappijwetenschappen (EMM)

MSc Leraar Voorbereidend Hoger Onderwijs in de Mens- en Maatschappijwetenschappen (LMM)

Dr. J.T. (Jan) van der Veen 01-02-2018 till 01-02-2020 MSc Master Educatie en Communicatie in de Bètawetenschappen (ECB)

H. (Heleen) Baarslag, MSc (Saxion) 01-07-2019 (contract) External member (assessment quality) Management Sciences

Prof. Tanya Bondarouk (chair) 01-09-2015 till 31-12-2019 MSc Business Administration (BA) Dr. R.P.M. (Raymond) Loohuis MBA (vice-chair) 01-09-2015 till 31-12-2019 BSc International Business Administration (IBA) Dr. M.R.K. (Martijn) Mes 01-02-2019 till 01-02-2021 MSc Industrial Engineering and Management (IEM) Dr. D.M. (Devrim) Yazan 01-02-2019 till 01-02-2021 BSc Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences (IEMs) H. (Heleen) Baarslag, MSc (Saxion) 01-09-2018 (contract) External member (assessment quality)

Table 2. Composition Examination Boards (EB) BMS, 2018-2019

7

Professionalisation

Dr. Loohuis and Prof. Bondarouk (both EB Management Sciences) successfully completed their SUTQ. Van Dijken and Peijster attended a customised course “Test cycle”. This course is a derived version of the BKO test cycle organised by CELT and given by H. Vlas. They both received a certificate.

Work procedures

Meetings

Table 3 presents the overview of monthly meetings of each Examination Board. The Examination Boards of Governance Sciences and Interdisciplinary Sciences handle their student requests during the monthly meetings. To optimize decision-making processes and free up time for policy and assessment quality discussions, the Examination Boards Management Sciences and Behavioural Sciences handle regular student requests (with clear jurisprudence) via email. These include requests such as an extension of the deadlines for delivery of the bachelor thesis due to personal circumstances, granting thesis confidentiality, or granting an extra test opportunity. More complex student requests (e.g., with potential precedent implications) are discussed during the meetings.

In 2018-2019, the chairs of the four Examination Boards met seven times in the so-called Chamber of Chairs. They discussed general topics, prepared the Annual Report, approved the Rules and Guidelines 2018-2019, reviewed fraud cases and student requests, as well as their monitoring activities related to safeguarding assessment quality. Other discussion points were:

• Formalisation of SAQ meetings with programme directors, improvement of communication with programme directors, and optimization of SAQ procedures

• Establishment of long-term plans for study units screening per degree programme • The governance structure and capacity within the registrar administration • Clarification of the role of external members of Examination Boards • Improvement of the reliability of BSc and MSc theses assessment (through extra assessment

methods) • Provision of timely and correct information about teachers’ qualification for appointment of

examiners.

Meeting # 2016-17 # 2017-18 # 2018-19

Behavioural Sciences 12 12 12 Governance Sciences 11 12 11 Interdisciplinary Sciences 9 8 9 Management Sciences 13 12 12 Chamber of Chairs (CoC) 6 5 7 Coordinator EB-CoC - with the Dean and/or Vice Dean

6 6 8

UT-wide EB 2 2 3 Table 3. Number of meetings of Examination Boards BMS

Mandates (as listed in Rules and Guidelines 2018-2019)

The Examination Board Behavioural Sciences continued working with mandates from 2017-2018, and mandated three categories of decisions to the programme directors:

• Decisions regarding allowing individual students who do not meet the qualifications to start their BSc or MSc thesis.

• Decisions on individual student requests regarding BSc minors. • Decisions on student requests regarding BSc and MSc electives.

The Examination Board Governance Sciences continued the mandates to the programme directors:

8

• Decisions on the student’s minor programme. • Decisions to deviate from the prerequisites to start with the bachelor or master theses.

The Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences continued the mandate to the programme directors:

• Decision-making regarding MSc electives, within programmes

The Examination Board Management Sciences mandated the following to the programme directors:

• Decision-making regarding individual student qualifications that allow them to start their BSc and/or MSc theses.

• Decision-making regarding the BSc individual minor projects.

• Decision-making regarding BSc and MSc electives.

• Decision-making regarding the individual programmes for elective semesters by the Programme Director of the MSc programme IEM

• The mandate to the thesis examiners to sign certificates for the IEM bachelor and master studies, as well as the BA master study.

• The mandate to Study Advisors for decision-making regarding administering student personal circumstances,.

Rules and Guidelines 2018-2019

The chairs of the Examination Boards established one set of Rules and Guidelines for all four Examination Boards at the Faculty of BMS. This document serves as a regulatory framework for the Examination Boards and for the individual examiners in all degree programmes within the Faculty of BMS. The Rules and Guidelines stipulate, amongst other topics, the criteria for examiners, guidelines regarding assessment, guidelines for student requests, and regulations in cases of an academic offence. The Rules and Guidelines 2018-2019 document is published on the website of the Examination Boards.

A procedure needs to be established to check how mandates work. In 2018-2019, EB-MS, EB-IS and EB-BS started the official procedure of checking mandates with the programme directors during the SAQ meetings (see minutes of the SAQ meetings). In 2019-2020, all Examination Boards at BMS need to establish and institutionalise practices on monitoring mandates.

9

3. Degrees awarded In the 2018-2019 academic year, the Examination Boards BMS awarded in total 1146 degree certificates, of which 148 students (12.9%) graduated with distinction (“Cum Laude”), see Table 4.

In comparison to the previous academic year, the number of Bachelor degrees awarded has been increased (from 365 in 2017-2018 – to 504 in 2018-2019), especially in the BSc Psychology (from 100 in 2017-2018 to 223 – in 2018-2019).The number of Cum Laude certificates has increased, especially in the BSc Psychology (by 5%) and IBA (7%).

The total number of certificates awarded to master students has been unchanged overall in the three academic years. The number of Cum Laude MSc certificates awarded has been increased overall by 2%.

The following observations stand out:

• The number of graduates with Cum Laude in the BSc Communication Science (16%), BSc Psychology (19%) and International Business Administration Bachelor (19%).

• The number of graduates with Cum Laude in the Master Communication Studies (21%), Master Psychology (13%), Master Public Administration (19%), Master Philosophy of Science, Technology and Society (17%) and Master Industrial Engineering and Management (13%).

In comparison to the previous academic year (2017-2018), the average Cum Laude ratio within the BMS BSc programmes increased from 10% to 14%. As a 5-10% Cum Laude ratio is generally considered normal, this can be considered a relatively high score. Regarding the MSc programmes, the Cum Laude ratio has increased from 10% to 12%.

These ratios need to be closely monitored again in 2019-2020. This issue is not new, as the Examination Boards discussed it several times with the programme directors and Vice-Dean on education, with the suggestion to check/re-consider the rules of granting Cum Laude certificates. However, these discussions did not result in changes to EER documents. In 2019-2020, the Examination Boards will conduct an extra action on safeguarding assessment quality for graduation certificates with Cum Laude (by randomly sampling reports on study results).

The proportion of certificates with Cum Laude was discussed with the programme directors. Three possible explanations were considered: selection of excellent students, examiners being too lenient in giving high marks (especially foreign teachers), and the good quality of the programmes. The Examination Boards did not see a reason to check the administrative procedures.

Degree Programme # certificates

2016-17

Cum Laude # certificates

2017-18

Cum Laude #certificates

2018-19

Cum Laude

# % # % # %

Bachelor

BSc Communication Science (B-COM)

22 2 9 29 4 14 37 6 16

BSc Education Science (OWK)

5 0 0 0 0 - 2 0 -

BSc Psychology (PSY) 150 32 21 100 14 14 223 42 19 BSc European Public Administration (EPA)*

82 6 7 56 5 9 73 7 9

BSc International Business Administration (IBA)

134 17 13 118 14 12 93 14 19

BSc Industrial Engineering & Management Science ** (IEMs)

57 2 4 62 1 2 76 3 4

10

Total Bachelor Degrees

450 59 13 365 38 10 504 72 14

Master MSc Communication Studies (M-COM)

88 9 10 87 16 18 85 18 21

MSc Educational Science and Technology (EST)

41 3 7 48 3 6 64 2 3

MSc Psychology (MPS)

150 8 5 161 17 11 129 17 13

MSc Public Administration (PA)

30 7 23 29 0 - 31 6 19

MSc European Studies (ES)

15 1 7 15 1 7 13 1 7

Master Risk Management (MRM)

7 1 14 13 1 8 7 0 -

Master Public Management (MPM)

12 0 0 14 1 7 8 1 10

Master of Environmental and Energy Management (MEEM)

15 4 27 31 4 13 26 1 4

MSc Philosophy of Science, Technology and Society (PSTS)

20 1 5 14 5 36 18 3 17

MSc Leraar VHO Maatschappijleer en -wetenschappen (LMM/EMM)

3 1 n.a.***

7 0 - 3 1 n.a.

MSc Science Education and Communication (ECB)

14 5****

1 7 14 7****

0 - 20 1****

1 5

MSc Business Administration (BA)

181 17 9 152 9 6 163 15 9

MSc Industrial Engineering and Management (IEM)

60 4 7 57 6 11 75 10 13

Total Master Degrees

636 57 9 642 63 10 642 76 12

Total certificates awarded

1086 116 11% 1007 101 10% 1146 148 13%

Table 4: Number of degree certificates and Cum Laude awarded

* In September 2018, this programme was officially changed to BSc Management, Society & Technology. Hence in 2018-2019, the students received their certificates under that programme name.

** From September 2018 the name of Technische Bedrijfskunde (TBK) was officially changed to Industrial Engineering & Management Science (IEMs)Ems.

*** To calculate % out of 3 students seems to be statistically unreasonable. **** These students followed a contract-route and were added to this table retrospectively in the annual

report of 2018-2019

Appointed examiners

The Examination Board formally appoints examiners who design and administer tests and who determine the results of these tests, including final thesis assignments (article 7.12c WHW). To qualify for this

11

appointment, examiners should have an UTQ certificate or equivalent (University Teaching Qualification, in Dutch: BKO, Basis Kwalificatie Onderwijs). Some academic staff members are exempted from the obligation to obtain an UTQ based on UT-wide policy. It should be noted that there are three sub-categories within the “exempted from UTQ” category at UT (formally, “dispensed”):

• Staff members who have successfully passed a previous version of the UTQ, such as the so-called DUIT at the UT.

• Professors with a contract of fewer than 8 hours per week • Staff with more than 20 years of teaching experience as of January 1st, 2011 • Staff members who have formally left the UT (e.g., because of retirement) but have a temporary

UT service appointment • Staff members who are appointed as examiners while working on their UTQ (within the first

three years of their appointment) • Staff members who are in the process of fulfilling language requirements.

The Chamber of Chairs has agreed that different Examination Boards will keep their customised solutions.

While appointing examiners, the Examination Boards and programme directors experienced several challenges that disrupted this process.

• The absence of a unified (HR) database that would contain up-to-date information about the qualifications of teachers to be appointed as examiners. Such a database will benefit the process of appointment of examiners in three ways: 1) examiners who have to be appointed by different Examination Boards will receive a single appointment decision letter; 2) programme coordinators and registrars will save time on searching and double-checking information on examiners from different sources; and 3) examiners from different Examination Boards will be appointed in the same way / decision letter.

The Examination Boards Behavioural Sciences appointed all examiners who were suggested by the programme directors (some with a waiver). They made a distinction between examiners for theses and modules/courses due to the difference in the necessary qualifications.

The Examination Board Governance Sciences appointed all examiners recommended by the programmes if they met the criteria. A few examiners were also appointed during the course of the academic year for specific courses and/or modules at the request of the Programme Director.

The Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences appointed all examiners who were suggested by the Programme Directors. The examiners were appointed during the academic year for the specific programmes.

The Examination Board Management Sciences appointed examiners at the start of the 2018-2019 academic year, but also during the course of the academic year at the request of the Programme Director.

Table 5a shows the number of examiners appointed per study unit per degree programme. Table 5b shows the number of examiners appointed per study unit and/or theses per degree programme.

Meetings with examiners and teachers

During the 2018-2019 academic year, the Examination Boards informed the examiners about relevant issues through the website, by joining the Educational meetings of the programme (EB-BS) and by organizing teachers’ meetings (EB-MS, 04-10-2018 and 21-03-2019). These meetings are viewed as an important activity to improve the quality of assessment in BMS.

The EB-BS addressed the following topics: fraud during exams and how to deal with it (detection, reporting, decision, sanctions); preventive measures; plagiarism; SAQ protocol and the modi operandus of the EB.

The EB-MS addressed the following topics: the confidentiality of BSc and MSc theses; changes in the Rules & Guidelines concerning the decision-making process; Rules & Guidelines concerning fraud and academic misconduct; student requests and cases – lessons to be learnt; results of the work of the Examination Board (from the annual report for 2017-2018); results of the international BSc and MSc thesis carrousel.

12

Within the Interdisciplinary Sciences programmes, the teachers were informed about rules and guidelines and other aspects regarding assessment during teachers’ meetings.

In 2019-2020, Examination Boards at BMS will re-start the tradition of writing newsletters with the purpose to share EB news and good practices.

13

Degree programme

Examiner recommended

Examiner Appointed

Remarks Examiner recommended

Examiner appointed

Remarks Examiner recommended

Examiner appointed

Remarks

2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Bachelor BSc MS&T 36 36 12 examiners obtained UTQ

16 exempted/dispensed from UTQ 4 UTQ in progress, 4 other

22 22 18 with UTQ 4 with a waiver

25 20

BSc IBA 98 93 62 examiners met all criteria 29 examiners appointed with waiver 5 persons were not appointed


50 50 21 with UTQ 29 with waiver

BSc IEMs (v/h TBK)

49 49 37 met all criteria incl. exempted 12 appointed with waiver



Master MSc PA 36 36 12 examiners obtained UTQ,

16 exempted/ dispensed from UTQ 4 UTQ in progress, 4 other


38 38

MSc ES 36 36 12 examiners obtained UTQ 16 exempted/dispensed from UTQ, 4 UTQ in progress, 4 other


20 20

MSc RM 10 10 1 examiner obtained UTQ 6 exempted/dispensed from UTQ, 3 other


36 36

Master PM 9 9 10 10 8 with UTQ 2 with a waiver

13 13

MSc EEM 17 17 5 exempted/dispensed from UTQ 3 obtained UTQ 2 UTQ in progress, 7 other


11 11

MSc PSTS 21 21 22 22 11 with UTQ 11 with a waiver

37 37

MSc LMM/EMM

7 7 23 23 12 with UTQ 11 with a waiver

14 14

MSc ECB 10 10 23 23 12 with UTQ 6 6

14

11 with a waiver MSc BA 70 68 58 examiners met all criteria

10 examiners appointed with waiver 2 candidates not appointed



MSc IEM 48 48 37 examiners met all criteria incl. exempted 11 examiners appointed with waiver



Table 5a. Examiners recommended by Programme Directors IS, GS and MS and appointed by Examination Boards absolute numbers)

2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Degree programme

Module/ course and theses

Remarks Module/ Course

Theses Remarks Module/ Course Theses Remarks

BSc/MSc COM 9 + 23 9 (all module coordinators) + 23

27 20 M/C: 18 with UTQ; 9 with a waiver Theses: 13 with UTQ; 7 with a waiver

18 + 3 24 13 with all qual. + 11 with a waiver

BSc/MSc PSY 12 + 19 12 + 19 40 71 M/C: 29 with UTQ; 11 with a waiver Theses: 31 with UTQ; 40 with a waiver

24 + 28 63 47 with all qual. + 26 with a waiver

MSc EST 0 + 15 0 + 15 69 69 C and Theses: 20 with UTQ; 49 with a waiver

13 65 25 with all qual.+ 43 with a waiver

Table 5b. Examiners recommended by Programme Director BS and appointed by Examination Board (absolute numbers)

15

4. Safeguarding Assessment Quality SAQ protocol

The Examination Board has the legal task to safeguard the quality of tests and examinations. This task is inseparably connected to the legal task to determine whether a student meets the final qualifications as stipulated in the Education and Examination Regulation before a certificate can be awarded.

The SAQ Protocol was formally established in February 2017 and adapted in May 2019 and is accepted by all boards to guide the process of safeguarding assessment quality and to set priorities to focus on in the coming years together with the Programme Directors.

The level of quality of test organisation has been added to this protocol. With the help of external members of the Examination Boards, a checklist was created which is used as guidance for the assessment quality safeguarding cycle. All four examination boards meet regularly with the programme directors to discuss the quality of assessment on these five levels:

• Safeguarding the assessment quality at the programme level; • Safeguarding the assessment quality of individual tests; • Safeguarding the assessment quality of bachelor and master theses; • Safeguarding the quality of test organisation; • Safeguarding the qualifications of examiners.

2018-19 Assessment Plan Screening theses Screening tests Appointing

examiners BS EB discussed the

assessment plans with all programmes

Registrar EB made selection for theses carrousel 2017-2018

COM: Damage Control (201600095); Module 7 Communication by design (test analysis, requested by EB); Advertising and Consumer Psychology (201800101) EST: Educational Measurement (201500149) PSY: Psychology in Learning and Instruction (201400121); History, Ethics and Philosophy of Psychology (201500179); Advanced Research methods for CRS (201600161)

Yes; see table 5b

GS EB discussed the assessment plans with all programmes

PA, ES and MS&T have not done a thesis carrousel

MS&T: Module Europe and the World (201700108) PA: Public governance and policy (194111240) ES: Policy Design and Implementation Beyond the Nation State (201500123) MRM: Risico en Veiligheid in ICT & Cyberspace; Operationeel Risicomanagement; Juridisch Risicomanagement; Risicoperceptie en Communicatie

Yes; see table 5a

IS Registrar EB made a selection for theses carrousel 2018-2019 for PSTS.

PSTS: Society, Politics and Technology (191612560) is being screened, no final results yet. EMM/LMM: Ontwerpstudio

Yes; see table 5a

16

For LMM/EMM and ECB it has been agreed that a screening carrousel will take place only once every 2 years

(201700049) ECB: Inleiding vakdidaktiek Wiskunde (197453720)

MS EB discussed the assessment plans with all programmes

An international BSc and MSc thesis carrousel IBA/BA was organized in December 2018/January 2019.

IEMs: Module 1 and Module 5 IEM: Warehousing IBA: SME module 5 BA: Quantitative and Design Methods in Business Research (1B) + Qualitative Methods in Business Research (2B)

Yes; see table 5a

Table 6. Overview information on screening by programmes

Meetings with Programme Directors

Examination Board Behavioural Sciences

In 2018-2019 the Examination Board BS met once with the programme EST (November 2018), three times with the programme BSc/MSc Psychology (November 2018, January 2019 and March 2019), and twice with the programme BSc and MSc COM (November 2018 and June 2019).

In general, the Examination Board concluded that quality assurance on all levels is adequately carried out by the programmes. The programmes have delivered their reports on each level of safeguarding to the EB, which revealed no threats or concerns regarding assessment quality. They all showed a pro-active and rigorous approach to maintaining and improving assessment quality.

Regarding the assessment quality at the level of tests (and units of study), the EB BS urges the programmes to have all modules (BSc) and courses (MSc) screened once every five years. To achieve this frequency, the programmes should screen yearly 2 modules in the bachelor programmes and 2 courses of the MSc programmes. However, at present this frequency is not feasible with the current facilities. The Examination Board BS was informed by colleagues of CELT that the Testing Assessment Committee (TAC) has a limited capacity to screen these modules and courses.

Examination Board Governance Sciences

In the 2018-2019 academic year, the Examination Board Governance Sciences and the programme management of MS&T, PA, ES of MPM, MRM and MEEM met twice (on November 2018 and March 2019). During the meetings with the PMT, several issues were discussed, like appointing examiners. The Examination Board mentioned that the list of examiners should be provided before the August meeting. Other issues were the role of the Examination Board members in graduation ceremonies, the quality assurance, and the workload and responsibilities of PMT and the Examination Board. The screening of the theses was also discussed, with an emphasis on the monitoring of the quality and documentation of the feedback.

Regarding the level of Safeguarding the quality of test organization, the Examination Boards have sent a request to the Dean to invest more in digital testing. They observed that the digital environment for individual written tests is still fragile, and depends on the Remindo provider. They are asking the Faculty Board to consider measures (together with the CES) to prevent technical difficulties during digital tests.

17

Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences

During previous years, the Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences met with the Programme Directors on an informal basis for general information exchange. These more informal communication lines appeared to be equally effective and important for discussing various issues.

In the 2018-2019 academic year, the cooperation between the programmes and the EB to achieve and maintain the quality of the programmes and thus safeguard quality assurance has become more settled. This resulted in a kick-off meeting between the Examination Board and the Programme Directors of the PSTS programme as well as the ECB, LMM and EMM programmes in the spring of 2019. In this meeting the lay-out for the future SAQ meetings was explained, and a meeting schedule was established. The programmes act more pro-actively if something changes within the programme and discuss and share information beforehand.

Examination Board Management Sciences

In the 2018-2019 academic year, the Examination Board Management Sciences met twice with the programme director of IBA/BA (on November 22nd, 2018 and June 21st, 2019) and three times with TBK/IEM (on January 14th, April 1st and June 17th, 2019). The main focus of the meetings in January was to determine whether the assessment quality of the programmes is safeguarded at the level of individual exams, especially of the 2nd semester of 2016-2017, and to reach consensus about future safeguarding plans. In the June (IBA/BA) and August (TBK/IEM) meetings, the assessment quality in general (whole academic year) and the level of individual exams of the 1st semester were discussed. This EB initiated an international peer review carrousel to validate the assessment quality of the thesis in IBA and BA with an EPAS partner (Zagreb, Vaasa).

The EB-MS, in collaboration with the programme directors, created the screening protocol as a response to the lack of capacity at CELT. This screening protocol includes traditional so-called deep screening, conducted by CELT, but also two alternative screening procedures: Peer Review Screening and Quick Screening (see Appendix).

18

5. Accreditation of the study programmes Examination Board Behavioural Sciences

In 2018-2019 the BSc and MSc Communication underwent accreditation. The EB BS was involved in the preparatory activities (self-evaluation report) and participated in the site visit in January 2019. Overall, assessment quality and the safeguarding activities by the EB BS were evaluated as adequate in the accreditation report. Nevertheless, the following issue was identified: safeguarding the assessment quality at the programme level was seen as a point for improvement. Accordingly, specific actions have been initiated to address this issue, including a revision of the programme assessment plan, checking heterogeneity in the final attainment targets due to electives, and an adjusted thesis assessment form more in line with the final attainment targets.


In June 2018 the visitation for the MEEM programme took place. The EB GS received praise from the QANU panel, which stated that “The panel interviewed members of the Board of Examiners. It concluded that they have a clear view of their tasks and responsibilities and that the Board works hard to guarantee the quality of assessment for all of the programmes it is responsible for. It confirmed that the Board’s recommendations are adequately taken up by the programme management. Many of the recent changes in assessment policy, such as the peer-review principle in test formulation and the new thesis assessment form, were developed as a result of discussions in the SAQ meetings”.


No accreditations of the study programmes in 2018-2019.


The BSc IBA and MSc BA programmes were visited by the accreditation bodies (NVAO and EPAS) in March 2019. The subsequent reports were sent to the EB MS. The members of the EB studied the reports and sent a letter to the PD to ask what actions were taken regarding recommendations given for the BSc IBA (to pay more attention in thesis projects to intended learning outcomes regarding design and organisation, to adjust the assessment rubric for theses by including the Meijer criteria for bachelor programmes more explicitly, and to reconsider the number of assessments per module) and the MSc BA (to specify in detail the difference between bachelor and master criteria for the thesis in the thesis assessment rubrics by using the Meijer criteria).

19

6. Decisions on individual student requests In the 2018-2019 academic year, the Examination Boards BMS handled a total of 269 student requests. The variance between the four Examination Boards is significant, with Examination Board Management Sciences handling more than ten times as many student requests as the Examination Board Interdisciplinary Sciences (133 versus 11). But this must be considered in proportion to the total number of students represented by both boards, which it reflects. One important aspect is the clear trend towards fewer requests per year across all boards. Compared to the other programmes there is a relatively high number of requests within the EB MS. We explain this by differences in programme-specific regulations (e.g. extended validity of results, extra exam opportunities, confidentiality of theses, and partly because of the mandates that are being issued). A detailed overview of student requests per programme can be found in the EB-specific appendices.

Number requests per EB Student requests

2016-17*

Student requests

2017-18

Student requests

2018-19

EB Behavioural Sciences 129 119 102 EB Governance Sciences 26 28 23 EB Interdisciplinary Sciences 16 18 11 EB Management Sciences 173 174 133 Total 344 339 269

Table 7. Number of student requests per Examination Board BMS (without mandates)

* information from Annual Report Examination Boards decide on various types of student requests, ranging from exemptions to a change in thesis language and from Cum Laude to confidentiality of the thesis (Table 8).

Type of request Student requests

2016-17

Student requests

2017-18

Student requests

2018-19

Adaptation of programme / curriculum 1 1 Appeals 3 7 Appointment of examiners 11 4 Confidentiality of thesis 34 43 38 Complaints 3 4 Cum Laude 25 28 18 Elective courses 20 9 5 Exemptions 42 47 27 Extension of validity of grades / test results

67 55 41

Extra exam or test opportunity 68 49 58 Fraud 21 17 Free (individual) degree programme 46 9 9 Language of thesis 7 - 1 Miscellaneous 23 16 8 Postponement of diploma 14 13 11 Postponement of presentation of thesis

18 23 18

Prerequisites 6 0 Special format of exam 1 1 1 Start of thesis 2 2 0 Minor 1 Total requests to BMS Boards 344 339 269

Table 8. No. of student requests submitted to Examination Boards BMS per type of request (without mandates)

20

7. Fraud cases In 2018-2019, the Examination Boards BMS received a total of 17 suspected fraud cases. In the context of the General Data Protection Regulation (AVG, Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming), information on the specific cases of fraud and plagiarism is summarized and anonymized.

Based on the national jurisprudence, self-plagiarism is not regarded as fraud. Consequently, the procedure for dealing with notifications of suspected self-plagiarism was adapted to this jurisprudence. The Examination Boards recommended to the programme directors regulating this issue via the EER for each programme by introducing a norm that in any format of testing, the student has to submit his (her) own and original work. If this is not the case, this will be considered as a violation of academic conduct. Some programme directors introduced a percentage of allowed content overlap in works submitted by students. The Examination Boards will handle notifications of self-plagiarism accordingly.


In 2018-2019 there were 13 notifications of fraud, involving 29 students, handled by the Examination Board BS. Seven of these notifications concerned plagiarism and one case of non-original work (i.e., copying own previous work and presenting it as new). In two cases of these seven cases students received a warning and were allowed to re-write the assignment by replacing the plagiarised text, and received a maximum grade of 6 for this re-take. In four other cases the students received a fail grade for the assignment, were assigned to re-do it completely (with maximum possible grade being 6), and were registered in the fraud register of the faculty BMS.

In one of these plagiarism cases a student copied text literally from a friend’s assignment. The student exculpated this friend and took all responsibility. This student received a fail grade, was given the chance to write a completely new assignment, will receive a maximum of 6, and is registered in the fraud register BMS. The friend received a warning. In one other plagiarism case involving five students, one student copied several complete annexes of work the student handed in previously into a new assignment. The student did not mention this to the other students of the group nor refer to it in the assignment. This student took full responsibility and exculpated the other group members. The student received a fail grade and had to re-write the annexes, received a maximum of 6 and was registered in the fraud register. The other students received a warning but could receive a higher grade than 6.

Four notifications concerned cheating during an exam. One case involved two students who were caught communicating verbally and non-verbally. Both received a fail grade and were registered in the fraud register. One student was allowed to do the first regularly planned re-take opportunity in the same academic year (maximum of 6). The other student was sentenced to do the re-take next academic year because of recidivism in a previous fraud case. In one case a student was caught with notes for the exam in a dictionary. The student received a one (1) for the exam, was allowed to take part in the re-take and was registered in the fraud register. In one case two students were suspected of cheating. They were moved apart at the beginning of the exam. Because there was no concrete proof of cheating, they received a warning. In one case a student was caught with notes directly at the start of the exam. The student took his exam without these notes and received a warning.

One notification was handled regarding an irregularity during an exam. The student kept on writing on his exam form after the formal end time. Fraud was approved based on the Regulations regarding Order arts. 4, 8, 19. The student received a fail grade for this exam and was allowed to participate in the re-take. The student was registered in the fraud register of the faculty.


The number of exemptions dropped from 11 in the previous academic year to 1 in the 2018-2019 academic year. In 2018-2019, the Examination Board Governance Sciences heard two fraud cases, one plagiarism and one cheating. The plagiarism was admitted by the student, and the assignment was not graded. The

21

student had to prepare a completely new assignment. In the case of cheating, the student was caught in possession of handwritten notes within a dictionary. The student received a fail grade for the exam, but got a chance to re-sit it the next academic year. Both students are registered in the fraud register of the faculty.


In 2018-2019, the Examination Board Governance Sciences heard one fraud case, which concerned plagiarism. The student received a warning and got the chance to ameliorate the assignment by removing all the plagiarism. The student is registered in the fraud register of the faculty.


In 2018-2019 the Examination Board Management Sciences received one notification of fraud, involving 1 student. This case concerned plagiarism. Because this student was a pre-master student, the case was handed over to the Programme director.

From the report on the number of fraud cases per EB, it seems like a big difference exists. The Chamber of Chairs calls for discussions about:

• Why do examiners in some programmes report fraud cases more often than in others? • Do all EBs apply similar prevention and sanction practices? • Do all programmes monitor fraud in a constructive and effective way?

In 2019-2020, the Examination Boards will publish guidelines for examiners and teachers about fraud prevention and dealing with fraud.

22

8. Appeals and Complaints In 2018-2019, the Examination Boards BMS received a total of five complaints and seven appeals.


Appeals

The first appeal was declared inadmissible. The student did not give the CBE any information on the appeal. In the second case, the EB had mediation meetings with the student and the teacher but decided that no additional information was received that would lead to revising the decision. As the student did not proceed with the appeal to the CBE, the case was closed. In the third appeal, a pre-master student requested an extra exam opportunity to be able to obtain her pre-master and be admissible for the master. The EB came to the conclusion, after mediation, that they had received no new information that would lead to revising the decision. As the student did not proceed with the appeal to the CBE, the case was closed.

Complaints

The first complaint handled the lowering of a grade after re-assessment by the examiner after discovering a mistake. In the meantime the student had re-taken the test and passed. Therefore, the student withdrew the complaint. In the second complaint the EB was asked by the CBE to mediate between a student and the programme. The student noticed after a long delay that a specific grade for a test of a component within a module was not received. The complaint was investigated, and the grade was eventually registered. The student therefore withdrew the complaint. Complaints number three and four handled the same case and therefore were treated together. Both students were of the opinion that the re-take of a test was far more difficult than the first test. The board investigated the case and had meetings with one student who acted as the representative and with the examiner. The board also asked CELT for an evaluation of both tests. The EB concluded that both tests were of a comparable level of difficulty. However, a miscalculation in the grading procedure was found, and all students involved in the re-take received an extra 0.4 points for this test.

Examination Board

Number of appeals

Number of complaints

Result of mediation

Continuation of appeal/ complaint

Decision CBE

Decision CvB

Behavioural Sciences

3 4 1)n.a. 2)no change decision EB 3)no change decision EB ___________ 4)n.a. 5)n.a. 6-7)change of grade

No No No No No No decision taken yet

Inadmissible Case closed Case closed Withdrawn Withdrawn n.a.

Governance Sciences

0 0

Interdisciplinary Sciences

0 0

Management Sciences

4 1 1) EB allows graduation Cum Laude 2) no change in EB decision 3) allowed postponed

No No No

Case closed Case closed Case closed

23

certificate 4) No change in EB decision – compensational pass 5) Revised grade: No change in grade

No No

Case closed Case closed

Table 9: Number of appeals, 2018-2019

24

9. Reflection 2018-2019 and main focal points for 2019-2020 and further

In 2018-2019, the Examination Boards BMS took new steps in professionalising relationships with the Programme Directors and improving the safeguarding of the assessment quality in all study programmes. The Chamber of Chairs is thankful for the good collaboration with the Dean and Vice-Dean on Education for regular discussions and support.

Main focal points for 2019-2020 and further

The Examination Boards BMS are gaining more experience in performing the tasks attributed to them in the Higher Education and Scientific Research Act. Some of the main focal points set for 2019-2020 are still related to the internal organisation of the Examination Boards while others have to do with executing tasks in interaction with degree programmes and programme directors. The Examination Boards see seven main improvement areas as targets for 2019-2020 and further:

1. Examination Boards call for urgent action to finalise the processes (policies and practices) of tests for screening the study units across all study programmes at BMS.

2. Examination Boards would like to ask the Faculty Board to design a database to automate the appointment of examiners.

3. Examination Boards will further develop guidelines for examiners and teachers about fraud prevention and dealing with fraud.

4. All Examination Boards at BMS need to establish and institutionalise practices on monitoring mandates given to programme directors for a number of decisions (they are all listed in R&G).

5. Examination Boards BMS will re-start the tradition of writing newsletters with the purpose to share EB news and best practices.

6. Regarding the level of Safeguarding the quality of test organization, the Examination Boards will sent a request to the Dean to invest more in digital testing. They have observed that the digital environment for written individual tests is still fragile, and depends on the Rimindo provider. We ask the Faculty Board to consider measures (together with the CES) to prevent technical difficulties during digital tests.

7. We continue our work on Safeguarding Assessment Quality, based on the SAQ protocol, in a close and constructive dialogue with the Programme Directors.

25

Response letter from Vice-Dean on Education to the Annual Report 2017-2018

Dear Chairs,

The Board of the Faculty BMS has received the Annual Report of the Examination Boards BMS for the 2017-2018 Academic Year. It would like to express its appreciation for the clear overview provided of the activities that have been performed by the Examination Boards in 2017-2018.

The annual report reflects that the structure of four, formally independent, examination boards, with the Chamber of Chairs as a coordinating entity, seems to provide sufficient synchronization, but also allows for adaptation to the demands of the various programs. The issue of both coordination and sufficient adaptability is also suitably mirrored in the structure of the report: on the one hand, subjects are discussed that are relevant for all four examination boards, such as mandates, degrees awarded, appointment of examiners, frequency and content of meetings with examiners or teachers and meetings with program directors; the common description allows for comparisons between examination boards and promotes the process of mutual understanding and learning from each other. On the other hand, the overview that is provided in the appendices A-B allows for an in-depth understanding of the activities employed by each examination board separately.

The faculty board is particularly satisfied with the progress that has been made in recent years with regard to a number of subjects, most notably the safeguarding of the assessment quality (using the SAQ protocol) and the fact that currently there are regular meetings (in most cases at least two times a year) between the examination board and the programme directors. We applaud this cooperation, since mutual understanding and communication are a necessary condition for quality improvements within the programs. Some examination boards also engage in vigorous interaction and communication with examiners and teachers within their programmes; the faculty board would welcome extension of this practice to other examination boards.

An issue of particular interest that is also mentioned in the report is the desired frequency of screening modules and courses. The annual report states that there is an issue with the capacity of screening, given the desired frequency of screening of exams (at least once every five years). We agree that there may be tension between the desired frequency of screening and the practical possibilities to achieve a specific frequency. We would like to tackle this issue in three steps. First, investigate in more depth the time that would be required for various forms of screening and find out in more detail, assisted by CELT, the resources that are available. Second, given the rather in-depth current level of screening of modules and courses, the great number of hours required to achieve that, and the repetitive nature of repeat screening, investigate possibilities for ‘lighter’ versions of screening that take less time but still provide sufficient confidence in the quality of screening. Third, increase the capacity dependent on the findings in the two previous steps.

Another important and time-consuming element of the work of examination boards that is discussed in the report are appeals and complaints. The faculty board observes that the number of requests is quite stable with 339 requests in 2017-2018, in comparison to 344 requests in 2016-2017. Also, the frequency of the various types of requests seems to be consistent over the years, except for a notable decrease in the request for a free (individual) degree program. It seems that a level of stability has been reached in the number of requests; whether this level of stability will remain the same after the introduction of TOM 2.0 needs to be monitored carefully. The faculty board agrees that the capacity that is needed to handle requests remains a relevant issue that requires structural attention; keeping the different stakeholders updated about this issue is pivotal. It also agrees that the capacity of the registry has been lower than required in the past year (due to external circumstances). The recruitment of additional staff, in particular for the executive secretary vacancy, should provide the necessary relief.

With regard to the main improvement areas for 2018-2019 and beyond, mentioned on page 23 of the report, the faculty board would like to make the following remarks. With regard to the first item, it supports the idea that members of examination boards appointed for a set period should not exceed this period. Although it has learned that this issue has been dealt with and that clear appointment letters have been sent out, establishing a monitoring system is required here to prevent repetition of this problem in the future.

The second item refers to the question of whether all examiners should receive a re-appointment letter each year from the examination board. Given the central role of the examination board in the appointment of examiners and

26

the importance of making examiners aware of the fact that appointment is the result of a deliberate annual process of the examination board, the faculty board supports the sending out of yearly re-appointment letters; using more efficient and standardized ICT solutions may contribute to tackling the possible administrative burden that comes with this process.

Besides communicating the appointments of examiners, the faculty board applauds, as mentioned earlier, all examination boards engaging in a broader required interaction with examiners on relevant issues (which the examination boards stress in item 3).

The faculty board has already responded to item 4 above. It would like to be more specific with regard to the importance of the delicate balancing between frequency (and intensity) of screening and the available resources. To support the balancing of demand and supply, it suggests developing, for example, a three- or four-point scale of intensity in screening methods (e.g. light, moderate, complete screening). In addition, a scheme of screening methods in relation to the specific circumstances could be developed. A deliberate application of a graded intensity of screening could allow for the screening of more modules and courses, achieving the same level of confidence in the quality of screening. If more resources are necessary after having refined the employed measures, the faculty board will make the necessary arrangements with CELT about additional capacity.

Item 5 refers to the observation of remarkable differences between examination boards with regard to the number of fraud cases. The faculty board welcomes the initiative taken by the examination boards to investigate how these differences can be explained and find out which relevant variables are responsible for them.

The faculty board responded above to the issue of “deficiency of manpower at the registrar office due to a long-term illness of the Executive Secretary” (item 6). It agrees that this problem should be solved asap. It has learned that actions have been taken and the required level of staff will be available very soon to support the valuable work of the examination boards.

The faculty board would like to take this opportunity to thank the examination boards for both a detailed and clear annual report that provides good insight into the activities of each commission separately, but at the same time allows for comparisons that enable the examination boards to learn from each other. It observes that important steps have been taken in the past years and recognizes that the progress that has been made is impressive. It agrees that additional steps are needed, though these steps are and always will be a structural and necessary element of a continuous sequence of gradual improvements.

Also on behalf of the Dean,

Best regards,

Vice-Dean (Education) BMS

27

Appendix A: Historical data per programme – examination board Behavioural Sciences

Meetings EB BS

Guidance Bachelor Thesis PSY 2nd semester 2018-2019

This year an extraordinary amount of students has started writing their thesis. To prevent overburdening of staff, the procedure for guiding these students has been adapted. Inspired by the procedure applied in the programme CW, the guidance and assessment by a second supervisor should be reduced and become more independent, by limiting the role of the second assessor should be limited to only assessing the thesis at the greenlight moment.

Rules of Order

Rules of Order are set on a central level. In addition, the information provided to Examiners, and sanctions in cases of fraud and plagiarism should be uniformed. An effort has been made to develop an updated set for the next year.

Fraud

During the year several issues have been discussed related to fraud and plagiarism. Several criteria have been set for a new fraud detection programme at the UT. Especially the output the system generates is valued as important. The source of turned in work should be visible. A database is requested that can be linked to this system.

A final set of instructions for invigilators has not been arranged yet. In the annual manual to examiners and invigilators a new coversheet for examinations and the notification form irregularities have been included.

Pilot requests MS

A pilot is run in handing in requests via a standardised web form, with positive results. For acknowledgement of personal circumstances a Declaration Special Circumstances has been drawn up to be filled out and signed by the applicable study counsellor. The examination board has adopted the Declaration Special Circumstances on the fulfilled condition that it happened in consultation with the study counsellors.

Appointment of Examiners

A format has been developed in which programme management can file their list of examiners. This format enables the appointment letters to examiners to be generated automatically. All examiners appointed should fulfil language and BKO requirements. HR is responsible for registering these requirements. A discussion has been going on about arranging a database or cloud file for this data, enabling easier access to this information. The lists of the current year have been retrieved from HR and verified by registry.

Capacity test committee

A letter has been sent to the dean regarding the need for increasing the capacity of the test committee, especially regarding the capacity of CELT. The largest shortages in capacity are related to screening and digital testing.

Digital testing

Several issues have been discussed related to digital testing. There is no cohesion in vision between the different examination boards within BMS about this matter, besides that all boards agree focus is needed on this topic. Therefore, separate letters have been formulated to the dean.

28

Annual Report

The Annual report is one document for the Examination Boards of the faculty BMS, in which each sub-board has a paragraph. Each point should be written down in such a way that the dean seas the need for action. Several overviews should ensure year-to-year comparability and enable identification of trends.

Teachers meetings

Several teachers meetings were organized during the year. Matters that were discussed included but were not limited to Safeguarding Quality of Assessment and plagiarism and a presentation of the efforts of the examination board. An important objective for these meetings is retrieving input of teachers about ongoing issues not yet identified.

Change of Duties

Board Member Dr. S. Janssen has handed over her duties to Dr. J. Karreman from May 2019. Dr. J. Karreman was already contact person for the Examination Board, and therefore well able to start carry out her work for the examination board directly from the start. Heleen Baarslag and Paul Schunselaar have been appointed during the year as external members of the examination board. Both are employees of Saxion University of Applied Sciences, and found well suitable out of their experience in educational matters and Safeguarding Assessment Quality.

English Language Glossary

A uniform English glossary should be adopted by the UT, especially with regard to the EER. Where this glossary cannot be adopted by the university as a whole, it should the least be uniform for the faculty BMS.

Verification Publication Summary on confidential theses.

A lack of control has been identified on the publication of the summary of confidential theses. It is unclear if summaries of confidential theses were handed in as confidential at Repository. As the share of confidential theses within BMS is low, the problem is not considered significant. Annual sampling by Repository is expected to improve this issue.

Appeal Test B-COM

Several issues have been going on about a test of B-COM. Extensive screening has identified some minor issues. Also see the section under Complaints of the EB-BS.

Vacancy for executive secretary

A vacancy has been set out for a new executive secretary. The vacancy has not been fulfilled yet, as of the end of the year 18-19.

A.1 Meetings

Meetings 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Meetings EB BS 11 12 12 12 Meetings Chairs of EBs within BMS 11 6 5 7 Meetings with the Dean -- 1 3 Meeting of all registrars -- 8 8

29

A.2 Appointed examiners

Appointed examiners

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 UTQ Waiver 2018-19

course thesis course thesis course thesis

B-COM (CW) 10 9 27 20 18 13 9 7 24 M-COM (CS) 26 21 27 OWK -- -- -- -- -- -- n.a. EST 21 20 69 20 49 68 PSY 12 12 40 71 29 31 11 40 24 MPS 19 18 28

A.3 Number of students

Number of student registrations per program 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Communicatie Wetenschap (B-COM) 135 116 139 144 Communication Sciences (M-COM) 223 192 172 161 Onderwijskunde (OWK) 11 9 4 4 Educational Science and Technology (EST) 99 109 122 132 Psychologie (PSY) 514 679 647 764 Psychology (MPS) 274 268 253 211 Total 1256 1373 1337 1412

* Source: https://www.utwente.nl/organisatie/feiten-en-cijfers/historie/instroom-en-inschrijvingen-2014-2018.pdf

A.4 Number of pre-master students

Number of student registrations per program 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Communication Sciences (CS) / Educational Science and Technology (EST)

65 73 71 81

Psychology (MPS) 71 59 70 59 Total 136 132 141 140

*Source: https://www.utwente.nl/organisatie/feiten-en-cijfers/historie/instroom-en-inschrijvingen-2014-2018.pdf

A.5 Number of graduates and Cum Laude certificates awarded

Graduates per programme

Graduates 2015-16

Graduates 2016-17 Graduates 2017-18 Graduates 2018-19

Graduates Graduates Cum Laude

% Graduates Cum Laude


%

BSc COM 59 22 2 9 29 4 14 37 6 16 BSc OWK 3 5 -- -- 0 -- -- 2 0 - BSc PSY 170 150 32 21 100 14 14 223 42 19 MSc COM 132 88 9 10 87 16 18 85 18 21 MSc EST 43 41 3 7 48 3 6 64 2 3 Msc PSY 165 150 8 5 161 17 11 129 17 13 Total 572 356 54 425 54 540 85

A. 6 Number of requests

https://www.utwente.nl/organisatie/feiten-en-cijfers/historie/instroom-en-inschrijvingen-2014-2018.pdf


30

Number requests per programme per year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 B-COM 7 17 11 M-COM 21 18 14 M-EST 11 10 15 B-PSY 47 45 47 M-PSY 43 28 16 Other 1 Total 178 129 119 102

31

A.7 Requests per category

Request per category / per programme

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

BS CW CS EST PSY MPS CW CS EST PSY MPS CW CS EST PSY MPS

Appeal / objection 4 1 2 1 Change language MSc-these 2 Complaints 2 2 1 Confidentiality of thesis 17 3 7 7 6 7 4 10 5 8 4 3 Cum Laude 4 2 2 1 3 7 1 2 3 Elective courses 6 2 2 1 1 1 Exemption 8 2 3 3 2 1 1 Extension validity of grades / test results

18 3 4 4 17 3 3 1 1

Extra exam or test opportunity 32 2 3 9 3 2 1 3 4 4 1 3 11 3 Fraud 18 5 2 1 8 2 2 2 8 1 Free (individual) degree programme

3 1 4 4 1 2 3 1

Inclusion extra courses / minor Language of thesis 2 Mandates 19 56 164 0 361 Miscellaneous 20 3 1 4 2 5 4 1 3 1 1 2 Postponement of certificate 8 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 18 2 Postponement presentation BSc thesis

13 18 1 22

Special format exam/special facilities

2 1 3

Start thesis 2 1 1 Total 178 7 21 11 47 43 73 18 10 209 29 11 14 15 408 16

32

A.8 Decisions

Decision per category positive

mandated negative not treated other double decisions

Total

2017-18 95 19 3 4 2 121-2=119 2018-19 79 1 20 3 3 4 106-4=102

A.9 Appeals

Appeals 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Number of appeals 4 4 0 3 Decision maintained by EB BS n.a. 2 Decision revised by EB BS n.a n.a. Continuation CBE Appeal n.a. 0 Decision CBE appeal founded n.a. Decision CBE appeal unfounded n.a.

33

Appendix B: Historical data per programme – examination board Governance Sciences

Meetings EB GS

Accreditation MEEM

In June 2018 the visitation for the MEEM programme has taken place. The EBGS received praise from the QANU panel, which stated that “The panel interviewed members of the Board of Examiners. It concluded that they have a clear view of their tasks and responsibilities and that the Board works hard to guarantee the quality of assessment for all of the programmes it is responsible for. It confirmed that the Board’s recommendations are adequately taken up by the programme management. Many of the recent changes in assessment policy, such as the peer-review principle in test formulation and the new thesis assessment form, were developed as a result of discussions in the SAQ meetings”.

Appointing examiners

The Examination Board examined the lists of examiners of MPM, MRM, MEEM, MS&T, PA and ES that were sent by the Programme Management. The examiners who meet the conditions that were established by the EBGS were appointed. Due to a delay in the retrieval of information about requested examiners per programme, and their qualifications, the examiners for the year 18-19 have first been appointed in the second half of the school year. Personnel from outside the UT has not been appointed as they as a rule do not have the authority to test. Clarified rules regarding the appointment of examiners have been drawn up. Throughout the year a few examiners in the role of supervising a thesis have been added to the list of approved examiners. The programme management has asked for approval because of the specific expertise of these examiners.

Screening courses

The Examination Board Governance Sciences needs to ensure, among other tasks, that the quality of testing within her department is guaranteed. In order to get a more direct view on testing within the modules, the EB GS started with inviting module coordinators from the MS&T programme to present the testing of a module by giving information about

• The learning goals and the relative weight of these learning goals and the way these goals are related to the overall learning pathways and learning goals at the programme level. • How the learning goals are reflected in classroom activities. The latter include: classroom discussion, lecturing, student presentations and peer evaluations. • How the learning goals are reflected in the course materials - e.g. what materials do students need to read and prepare. • How the learning goals are tested for - testing matrix.

In 2018-2019, MS&T module 3 and 6 were discussed. For the coming academic year, this practice will be continued.

MPM incident with signature fraud

In March 2019, after the passing of the programme coordinator of MPM, and with her tasks being taken over by Michel Lindemann, it appeared that the programme had illegitimately used the signature of the chairman of the Examination Board Governance Sciences to sign course certificates (not the final degree/diploma, which is always signed by the chairman), without the chairman’s knowledge or consent and without the programme director’s knowledge or consent. Many of these certificates (that were issues to give proof for a student that a course had been completed) had been issued with the chairman’s digital signature. After this fraudulent conduct came out, the issue was discussed. It seemed that the deceased programme coordinator had not used the signature for malevolent purposes but tried to add some status

34

to the certificates that were issued. After discussion, the programme stopped continuing this practice and a new procedure for issuing a certificate for students has been formulated and adopted.

Meeting all UT-EB’s

In 2018-2019, several meetings of all UT-Examination Boards took place. These meetings were meant for information exchange and not for decision-making. The UT-wide platform for examination boards is now well-established.

Succession of the secretary

In May 2018 the new executive secretary, P. Biekart was appointed, who provided the sort of support that the Examination Board Governance Sciences wanted and needed. Unfortunately, due to unforeseen events, the executive secretary was compelled to quit her position on 31-12-2018 and since then the position has not been fulfilled yet.

Assessment policy

The question has aroused about to what extent the Examination Board can guarantee that the assessment policy is executed, controlled and followed-up upon as the Examination Board does not always have the necessary resources to execute a lot of analyses. The Examination Board operates in this matter ex ante and not ex post. The assessment policy is discussed in the bi-annual SAQ meetings. The Examination Board needs to ensure that the programme management fulfils their tasks in the quality of assessment and can advise the programme management in this matter. Though, the most important responsibility of the Examination Board is to guarantee that a certificate is rightfully issued. The Examination Board occasionally wonders if the programme management has enough awareness concerning all examination matters.

Meetings PMT’s

The autumn and spring meetings with the PMTs of 6 programmes were fruitful.

Members of the Examination Board Governance Sciences

Adema has left the Examination Board Governance Sciences. From September 2018, he has been succeeded by drs. Schunselaar, an external member, who has competence in exams and assessment policy and examination board experience. Daskalova has been reappointed and can be reappointed one more period after this period.

Succession of the secretary

In May 2018 the new executive secretary, P. Biekart was appointed, who provided the sort of support that the Examination Board Governance Sciences wanted and needed. Unfortunately, due to unforeseen events, the executive secretary was compelled to quit her position on 31-12-2018 and since then the position has not been fulfilled yet.

Quality of assessment criteria

The examination Board has due to an appeal from last year identified a possible inconsistency in the interpretation of assessment criteria within an element of the bachelor European Public Administration, (MST as of the year 18-19). The Examination Board has formulated an advice to the programme management regarding preliminary suggestions for improvements in the study programme and proposals of how students can be better protected to suggestive assessment. This advice has been discussed with the Programme Director. Because of this pro-active attitude, the Examination Board has been able to contribute constructively to mutual better insights regarding more diligent / careful assessment.

Cum Laude

The percentage of students graduating with distinction within BMS is comparably high within the Examination Board GS. This concerns the programmes of PA-ES and MEEM. Within MEEM 27% of the students graduated Cum Laude while the norm is around 10%. The formulation of a new assessment form

35

has been proposed, which might change the tendency to grant excessively high marks. The applicable programme management will revise the assessment form.

ITK

A project group has been set up for the approaching ITK, e.g. Van Luijk, Vlas and Lindemann are involved.

Digital Testing

Digital testing is now in the pilot phase. The data can be used for broad analysis. The standpoint of the Examination Board with regard to digital testing includes arguments to ensure student’s rights and wellbeing during exams. Furthermore, a plan B regarding what to do in cases of technical failure or emergencies should be set up. Teachers should receive enough support, resources and training in the procedures around digital testing. The examination Board is very positive about the possibility for extensive analysis of the exams, and diverse way of asking questions the software offers.

R&G 2019-2020

The members sent their remarks by email after which the Rules & Guidelines have been established.

Fraud and Plagiarism

Several issues have been addressed regarding fraud and plagiarism. Topics included the formulation of a sanction policy within the faculty and faculty wide rules and regulations around fraud and plagiarism. University wide rules of order have been formulated. These will be included on the coversheet of all exams.

Plagiarism Software

Special regard has been given to a new plagiarism software. The neglect to use plagiarism software by teachers has earlier been addressed by the accreditation committee. A workgroup has been created, because the problem concerns the whole university. The workgroup will explore how quick the university can deliver/use a good working anti-plagiarism scan. The plan is to have a new scan before the 1st of September 2019.

Annual report

The examination board has decided to add information on previous years in the appendix of the annual report to chart developments. Even though it has a limited use, as the Examination Board-GS does not receive so many requests, it is useful for when audits take place.

Submitting requests via an adapted web-form

The Examination Board of MS has run a pilot in submitting requests via an adapted web-form and a Declaration Personal Circumstances. The Examination Board MS is satisfied with the results and therefore this procedure needs to be instigated in other Examination Boards as well, as agreed in the CoC.

Student appeal

A student has submitted an appeal at the CBE concerning her grade for her bachelor thesis. Her thesis was presented to a third party, because there was no agreement between the first and second examiner. The Examination Board thinks that the student cannot be blamed; the first examiner indicated that she was on the right track with her research. The members wonder whether it is possible to give her an extra chance for the bachelor’s thesis or to address another (fourth) examiner.

Supervising Bachelor theses

There is a lot of difference in supervising the theses. There was a critical note of the accreditation committee.

B.1 Meetings

Meetings 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

36

Meetings EB GS 11 12 11 Meetings Chairs of EBs within BMS 11 6 5 7 Meetings with the Dean -- 1 - Meeting of all registrars -- 8

B.2. Appointed examiners

Appointed examiners

2016-17 UTQ Waiver

2017-18 UTQ Waiver 2018-19 UTQ not appointed

MS&T 36 28 8 22 18 4 23 2 ES 36 28 8 14 11 3 20 PA 36 28 8 24 20 4 38 MEEM 17 8 9 17 8 9 11 2 MPM 9 9 10 8 2 13 11 0 MRM 10 10 16 10 6 36

B.3 Number of students*

Number of student registrations per programme

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

MS&T 303 225 199 201 ES 38 40 36 46 PA 69 69 75 76 MEEM 70 47 2 MPM 63 MRM 76 57 65 45


B.4 Decisions

yes/no decision per programme Positive Negative

2018-19 18 4

B.5 Requests per category

Request per category 2017-18 2018-19 Appointment examiner 6 3 Appeal / complaints 1 Change language MSc-these 1 Confidentiality of thesis 1 4 Cum Laude 1 2 Exemptions 11 1 Extension validity of grades / test results 1 1 Extra exam or test opportunity 4 3 Fraud 2 Free (individual) degree programme 3 Miscellaneous 1 Postponement of diploma 2 2


37

Special format exam/special facilities 1 Total 28 23

38

B.6 Number of graduates and Cum Laude certificates awarded

Number of graduates per programme

Number of Graduates 2015-16

Number of Graduates 2016-17 Number of Graduates 2017-18 Number of Graduates 2018-19

Graduates Graduates Cum Laude % Graduates Cum Laude % Graduates Cum Laude %

MS&T 82 6 7 56 5 9 73 7 9 ES 15 1 7 15 1 7 13 1 7 PA 30 7 23 29 0 0 31 6 19 MEEM 15 4 27 31 4 13 26 1 4 MPM 10 12 0 0 14 1 7 8 1 10 MRM 7 1 14 13 1 8 7 0 -

B.7 Appeals

Appeals 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Number of appeals 0 1 1 Decision maintained by EB GS Yes Decision revised by EB GS Continuation CBE Appeal No

withdrawn

39

Appendix C: Historical data per programme – examination board Interdisciplinary Sciences

Meetings EB IS

Screening Theses The Examination Board expressed her appreciation to the programme coordinators for the manner in which the screening of the theses has been done. The Board advised the programmes to consider using a rubric for the assessment forms, especially regarding the final thesis. In this way higher objectivity of assessments can be established. The calibration sessions have proven to be fruitful and can lead to a detailed description of the assessment criteria. The Board has given her advice in a letter to the Programme Management.

Student issues The Examination Board prefers to discuss student requests during the monthly held meetings. In this way the student requests are handled timely, and by discussing each decision, full support of the members is given. Occasionally a request has led, after careful deliberation to issue a mandate to the programme director to make decisions on these matters for future cases.

Quality of assessment criteria

Upon request of the Programme Director the Examination Board approved an elective for the PSTS-programme. The conditions for the EER, the Programme Specific Annex and the method of grading have been sent to the Programme Director. The Examination Board handled a case where a teacher from the PSTS-programme did not grade the individual components of a course according the regulations of this course and thus, unintentionally graded inaccurate. The Examination Board decided that students should not be harmed during the study year and informed the Programme Director to instruct the teacher to prevent this situation to happen in the next academic year. The Board handled according the rules in the EER (chapter 8) and the R&G (chapter 8) where it is stated that the rules cannot be changed during the academic year when this is disadvantageous to the student.

Appointment of examiners The Examination Board decided that the examiners will be appointed to examine in the entire programme. The Programme Directors are mandated to allocate the courses to the examiners. Upon request of the Programme Director some small additions have been made to the list of examiners during the academic year.

Change of roles

After careful consideration and selection Heleen Baarslag has been appointed as external member of the Examination Board in July 2019. She is currently working at Saxion University of Applied Sciences and is experienced in assessment quality and the functioning of examination boards. Michiel Waltmann’s membership was terminated in August as he left the University. He was succeeded by Hinke Mul, who is appointed as of 1 September as a member of the Examination Board. Appointment and termination of appointment letters of the Examination Board members have been signed by the Dean.

Cum Laude The percentage of diplomas with Distinction within the PSTS-programme is rather high (36%). The analysis on the study progress overviews of these students has been done by the chair of the Examination Board and no discrepancies have been found. It was concluded that the quality of this cohort of students was very high.

Certificates The Examination Board has talked about the diploma procedure with the BOZ-team and found two issues with regard to issuing a diploma that can be improved. The improvements consists of sending an overview of the Osiris report to a member of the Examination Board who check whether the student can

40

pass and with which distinction. These improvements were discussed with the programme coordinator of the ECB, LMM/EMM-programmes and are implemented.

Annual report The annual report has been discussed in the Examination Board meeting.

UC-Ow document open access master theses The Examination Board discussed this document and informed the Programme Directors about the UT-wide policy on open access for master theses.

SAQ-meeting The Examination Board organised a kick-off meeting with the Programme Directors and Programme Coordinators of the PSTS-programmes as well as the ECB, LMM and EMM-programmes in April 2019. In this meeting the protocol and the plans for separate meetings with the programmes were discussed as well as a meeting schedule.

Assessment policy The Examination Board has expressed her concern about the limited capacity of CELT when it comes to screening courses. This concern has been discussed in the CoC meeting with the Vice-Dean.

Digital Testing The Examination Board has discussed digital testing and concluded that digital testing offers good opportunities for the faculty of BMS. The role of the Examination Board in this matter will entail screening of quality, validity and fraud. The Examination Board advised the CoC to work on a faculty wide level on the process of checks and expertise.

COM-PSTS Double Degree The Programme Directors of COM and PSTS have set up a proposal for a double degree. The Examination Board likes this idea of combining the programmes but after careful studying the proposal the Board adviced the Programme Management on several issues that need more consideration and time before the double degree can be approved by the Board.

Fraud and Plagiarism A member of the Examination Board has played a role in the selection committee for the new plagiarism software that will be implemented in the University of Twente. The committee has decided on the plagiarism TurnItIn which pleases the Examination Board because of the possibilities this programme offers.

Mandates During the academic year 2018-2019 the Examination Board mandated to the programme directors:

• A mandate to the programme of PSTS to decide on a combined master thesis for PSTS and COM • A mandate to the programme director of PSTS to decide if an examiner can stay involved in the thesis committee after termination of the UT-appointment. This continuation can last for one year at the most • The mandate in decision-making to the programme directors of PSTS and ECB, EMM/LMM regarding MSc electives, within programmes, under the programme director’s responsibility • A mandate to the programme directors to allocate the courses to the examiners

C.1 Meetings

Meetings 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Meetings EB IS 9 Meetings Chairs of EBs within BMS 11 6 5 7 Meetings with the Dean -- 1 Meeting of all registrars -- 8

41

C.2 Appointed examiners

Appointed examiners 2016-17 UTQ 2017-18 UTQ Waiver 2018-19

PSTS 21 21 22 11 11 37 LMM/EMM 7 7 23 12 11 6 ECB 10 10 23 12 11

C.3 Number of students*

Number of student registrations per programme

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

PSTS 62 66 59 60 LMM/EMM 18 20 14 7 ECB 58 48 49 51


C.4 Number of graduates and Cum Laude certificates awarded





Graduates Cum Laude



%

PSTS 20 1 5 14 5 36 18 3 17 LMM/EMM 3 1 n.a. 7 0 n.a. 3 1 n.a. ECB 14 1 7 14 0 n.a 20 1 5

C.5 Requests per category

Request per category / per programme 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Appointment examiner 1 Cum Laude 2 1 Elective courses 7 3 Exemptions 2 2 Extra exam or test opportunity 1 1 Fraud 1 Miscellaneous 1 2 Postponement of diploma 1 Prerequisites 4 Total 18 11

C.6 Decisions

yes/no Positive Negative not treated other

2018-19 7 2 1 1

C.7 Appeals

Appeals 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Number of appeals/complaints 1 0 0


42

Appendix D: Historical data per programme – examination board Management Sciences

Meetings EB MS

Appointment of examiners

Both IBA/BA and IEMs/IEM PMT provided a list of teachers to be appointed as examiners, from which the appointment letters have been generated.

Assessment policy document

The document has been adapted Level A : programme level – once per year Level B : study units – try to get this arranged Level C : final examinations – thesis carrousel Level D : test organization – has not yet been checked and should be added to the checklist Level E : Examiners – will be done in (latest) August

A checklist has been designed.

Executive Secretary

The executive secretary fell ill. Most of her work for the EB MS has been taken over by Van Dijken. As a result, she has made extra hours since October 2018.

External member

Heleen Baarslag (Saxion) has been appointed for 30 hours a year. 2/3rd of the EB MS meetings need to be attended. Within the available hours she could be asked to streamline existing documents needed for the SAQ such as the screening policy document, the SAQ protocol document, document prepared by Corrie Huijs, to do screenings of some tests within modules/courses and determine their contribution to the ILO’s, International peer- review of IBA and BA theses.

ITK

The recommendation then was to pay special attention to the Examinations Board and especially to the assessment quality and the theses.

Mandates

Old mandates have been extended, some new mandates have been issued.

OLC minutes of both IEM/s and I/BA

For a better cooperation the OLC sends their minutes to the EB MS and if necessary they are discussed during the EB MS meetings.

Pilot web application for EB MS

EB MS will start a pilot with the web application for requests EB MS in order to have more transparency, more complete requests.

Revised documents:

• Rules & Guidelines, Regulation of order, Coversheet exams, Notification of Fraud

All documents have been discussed during the meeting and adjustments/advice were added.

Rules for a summary of confidential thesis are set up

For IEM/s

• A title identical to the title of the thesis; main topic of the thesis; purpose of the thesis; research

43

questions; research design; literature review; solution design (methods or interventions); methods used for validation of the design; results, conclusions, or recommendations

For I/BA

• Relevance and purpose of the thesis; Theoretical background; The research gap that is addressed; The approach taken, the methods of analysis; Main findings; Discussion of the main findings; Theoretical contributions; Practical contributions. At least one week before graduation both your full (but confidential) thesis as well as the summary have to be submitted to the Examination Board. The Examination Board will assess the summary on completeness and informs you about the results. If the summary meets the requirements as described above, it can be uploaded (by the student) to the University Library. Next to that you will have to deliver your full thesis to the Repository so it can be archived in your University student file (confidentially). This is obliged so the thesis can be used in cases of review for accreditation bodies. In case the summary does not meet the aforementioned requirements, you have 2 weeks to re-submit the Examination Board an appropriate summary. If the requirements are then still not met, the thesis will be made public.

Student contracts for thesis project or internship

Make examiners/supervisors and students aware of intellectual property

Teachers meetings

4th October 2018: the confidentiality of theses; inform you about the Rules & Guidelines of the Examination Boards BMS concerning fraud and academic misconduct; share cases from 2017-2018 and the lessons to be learnt; inform you about recent changes in the Rules & Guidelines of the Examination Boards BMS concerning the decision making process.

21st March 2019: Annual report; IBA/BA results screening from international carrousel; interesting Student case; to ask teachers for extra topics.

Thesis in review in University Library

There are 43 theses in review in the UL. Claudia van Dijken (registry) collected the opinions of the members of the board. The board believes that equal cases should be treated equally. That is why it was decided that: if a summary had to be submitted and this was not done by the student, the thesis will be made public; If a student did not submit a request for confidentiality to the EB MS, the thesis will also be made public; one thesis from the list will be marked as confidential as the EB failed to respond to an email from the student.

International thesis carrousel

A selection of the BSc and MSc theses were part of the international theses carrousel. All theses with a grading difference of 2 points or more were reviewed by UT examiners of the same track. The outcome was that they confirmed the previous UT grades except for one thesis (HRM). The question raises on what action to take to follow up. Decided is to inform Michel Ehrenhard what we noticed and ask him what action will be taken. We could propose to him to have a broad discussion within the track or programme.

44

D.1 Meetings

Meetings 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Meetings EB MS 11 13 12 12 Meetings Chairs of EBs within BMS 11 6 5 7 Meetings with the Dean -- 1 1 Meeting of all registrars -- 8 8

D.2 Number of students*

Number of student registrations per program

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

BSc IBA 552 471 438 411 MSc BA 342 374 373 364 BSc TBK/IEMs 292 319 356 379 MSc IEM 185 182 197 232 Total 1371 1346 1364 1386


D.3 Appointed examiners

Appointed examiners

2015-16 2016-17 UTQ Waiver not appointed

2017-18 UTQ Waiver 2018-19 UTQ Waiver

IBA 58 93 62 29 5 82 45 37 50 21 29 BA 57 68 58 10 2 75 49 26 93 55 36 TBK/IEMs 37+37 35 31 4 46 28 18 50 34 16 IEM 26 25 1 32 20 12 51 35 16 Total 115 222 235 242


45

D.4 Number of student requests

Number requests per programme per year

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

IBA 136 55 42 42 BA 63 43 36 23 TBK/IEMs 72 50 67 49 IEM 40 24 17 19 Total 311 172 162 133

D.5 Number of graduates and Cum Laude certificates awarded


Number of Graduates

2015-16

Number of Graduates

2016-17

Number of Graduates

2017-18

Number of Graduates

2018-19

Graduates Cum Laude




%

BSc IBA 149 17 11 134 17 13 118 14 12 93 14 19 BSc TBK (IEMs)

48 1 2 57 2 4 62 1 2 76 3 4

MSc BA 174 13 7 181 17 9 152 9 6 163 15 9 MSc IEM 70 4 6 60 4 7 57 6 11 75 10 12 Total 441 35 432 40 389 30 407 42

46

D.6 Student requests per category

Request per category / per programme

2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Type of request IBA BA IEMs (TBK)

IEM IBA BA IEMs (TBK)

IEM IBA BA IEMs (TBK)

IEM

Appeal 2 2 1 2 3 1 Appointment examiner 1 Change language MSc-these

1

Confidentiality of thesis 4 3 4 6 4 5 1 3 7 3 Complaints 1 Cum Laude 3 8 4 9 5 5 4 Elective courses 2 1 3 Exemptions 7 1 21 1 1 2 26 2 9 12 1 Extension validity of grades / test results

12 11 6 1 25 4 11 4 18 4 15 1

Extra exam or test opportunity

12 10 14 4 8 5 17 10 5 12 6

Minor 1 Fraud 1 1 2 1 Free (individual) degree programme

17 3 1 8 2 3 1 1 1

Inclusion extra courses 1 1 Miscellaneous 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 Postponement of diploma

4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2

Special format exam/special facilities

1

Start thesis 2 Total 61 46 59 26 42 36 67 17 42 23 49 19

47

D.7 Appeals

Appeals 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Number of appeals 4 3 5 Decision maintained by EB MS 3 3 3 Decision revised by EB MS 1 2 Continuation CBE Appeal 2 2 0 Decision CBE appeal founded 1 1 Decision CBE appeal unfounded 1 1

D.8 Decisions

2017-18

Yes/no decision per programme

yes no double (yes and no)

mandated not treated other CBE Positive Negative

IBA 31 12 5 1 1 2 1 BA 20 12 2 2 0 4 2 1 1 TBK/IEMs 36 48 6 10 2 17 IEM 13 4 1 1 0 1 Total 100 76 14 14 3 24

2018-19

IBA 25 13 2 1 1 3 3 BA 13 8 1 1 1 1 TBK/IEMs 32 9 2 1 5 1 1 IEM 8 7 1 3 Total 78 37 2 3 4 9

faculty of behavioural, management and social … report...2019/12/16 · 1 faculty of behavioural,...

Documents