UNIVERSITY OF THE ARTS LONDON

EXTERNAL EXAMINER REPORT FORM

Name of External Examiner: Clare Brass

College: London College of Fashion

If acting as a Mentor, state to whom

Course:
(e.g. BA Fine Art, and where appropriate, pathway): Fashion and the environment

Academic Year (e.g 2006/2007): 2009/2010

This is your report on the course examined in the standard format required by the Academic
Standards and Development Committee of the University of the Arts London. As well as being
seen by the relevant academic and administrative staff at the University, this report will be
made available internally, and to the University community (including students), via the
Quality Information Intranet site. Therefore anyone with access to University IT facilities will
be able to read it.

Copies of this report will also be made available, if requested, under the Freedom of
Information Act but will first be subjected to scrutiny to ensure that no information which can
be construed as personal data is included. In accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998,
information included within the report relating to named individual students or members of
staff will also be made available to those individuals if requested by them but may be
conveyed in summary form.*

FULL REPORT
This report will be seen by academic and administrative staff at the University, will be made
available internally, and to the University community, via the Quality Information Intranet site.

1. Administration
Were the following administrative arrangements satisfactory and was the following
information provided to you?

(a) External Examiner Handbook (for newly Yes No

appointed Examiners):
(b) Course Handbook: Yes No
(c) Assessment briefs: Yes No
(d) Arrangements for meetings and Yes No
Examination Boards
If you indicated ‘no’ to any of the above, please add any additional comments: (Write
a maximum of 100 words)
I would recommend that for new external examiners it would be useful to have some
kind of a very ‘brief briefing’ about how the exam board meeting works in order to
allow better preparation of observations. This information may well have been
contained within the examiners pack, but it was received too long ago and was too
thick for retention!
2. Assessment Standards
Please comment on the quality and standards of the assessment process, drawing particular attention
to: (a) internal marking; (b) internal moderation; (c) the conduct of the Examination Board. Overall, in
your view, has the process of assessment been soundly and fairly conducted? (Normally write
between 100- 200 words)

This is a challenging and very important new subject area, and I am very pleased that
UoA is taking a leadership role in this field. It needs driving forward with plenty of
support from the college.

I made an interim visit in December and spoke to 7 students about their work and
their experience of the course. I found them all to be highly motivated and self-driven,
covering overall a surprising range of project ideas across the subject area. There is
a strong sense of collaboration between students, and a great deal of support from
internal staff. Considering the early stages of this course, I found a surprisingly good
body of work that will definitely provide a useful platform that will provide students in
the next years with a spring-board for a good head start. I returned in January to see
their marked work and fully agree with the assessments and marking made.

I have the following comments:

• I think the peer review system is valuable and useful to students and staff
• The assessments seem both formative and assumative
• There have been several internal and external feedback sessions
• The project work has all been double blind marked and internally verified by
two members of staff from within the graduate portfolio.

I think my visits and interaction with the students were extremely useful, and in future
years I would like to do this at an earlier stage of the project.

3. Student Performance
Please comment on: (a) particular strengths and weaknesses revealed during your involvement in the
assessment process (but do not mention individual students by name); (b) the distribution of marks; (c)
whether student performance is comparable to similar courses in your experience. (Normally write
between 100- 200 words)

There is a good banding across all levels of achievement ranging from 48% to 88%,
which in my experience is quite normal for a course at this level and of this
complexity. This is a complex subject area that requires a great deal of student
maturity and a thorough systemic approach, which clearly is challenging for some
students, although all students managed to find their own pathway through the
course. Students at the top end of this bandwidth have demonstrated some
outstanding innovation and design capability.

Several students, even if performing less well academically, will certainly be able to
return to the world of work with substantially valid and useful contributions to
business. The students demonstrated the acquisition of a broad range of skills from
practice-based work to film, photography and interactive workshops as seen at the
exhibition held at the South Bank. I found many of their projects to be too long and in
need of greater control and rigour with regards to presentation.

The exhibition, held in the context of Cape Farewell, added weight and validation to
the course, was both successful and exciting and helped gain valuable and
appropriate exposure for students and their work.
4. Appropriateness of Assessment
Please comment upon appropriateness of the assessments. In particular: (a) were the assessment
requirements appropriate to the level of the award, and (b) did the assessment methods allow each
student to demonstrate achievement of the learning outcomes (Normally write between 100- 200
words)
As above. Only comment is that I wonder if in the case of this particular course, and
now having run it once, if it would be worth revisiting the learning requirements, which
might be slightly different from other equivalent levels of study in the field of fashion.

5. Quality Enhancement of the Student Experience

In your opinion, within its stated aims and outcomes, what recommendations would
you make that could enhance and improve the student experience of this course
(Normally write between 100- 200 words)

I think the course would benefit from:

• A better access to for students to technicians and workshops to support their
ability to present more refined finished practical work.
• More tutorials from external visiting practitioners/tutors
• Some training or tutorials in business and entrepreneurship
• Extra funding and support to provide contacts and build bridges with the
outside world.
• Some support to students in developing their skills in the presentation and
refining of their final work.

A visit from the examiner at a slightly earlier stage should be institutionalised.

I also feel that there is a need for very strong links to activities outside college,
particularly with industry and government. The close ties that the Centre for
Sustainable Fashion has developed with Defra, and in particular their sustainable
clothing road-mapping project, for example, are extremely useful and add huge
credibility to LCF. The C.S.F allows this interaction and the model of cross feeding
between research, curriculum and enterprise activity is a great asset to the course.

6. Any Other Comments

Please give comments on any matter(s) not raised elsewhere that you feel would be helpful arising from
the assessments and the assessment process. (if you choose to make any comments, normally
write between 100- 200 words)

I am delighted and honoured to have been involved in the first stages of this
important new course and I would like to compliment Dilys and her team for their very
hard work to put it all together. I think this will become a very valuable addition to the
portfolio of courses already established. Thank you!

7. Account Taken of Previous Comments

If you have acted as an External Examiner for this course before, are you satisfied
that the comments made in your previous report have been adequately considered.
(Normally write between 100- 200 words)

N/A

When completed, please return this pro forma electronically to:

Elizabeth Rouse, Deputy Rector, Academic at: examiners@arts.ac.uk

* The University of the Arts London acknowledges the University of Surrey for this disclaimer.