This is a diary of my involvement in a project on collaborative learning in the psychology department at the University of South Africa. Most recent posts below and links to previous posts on the left.
Academic institutions typically do not have a direct hold over external examiners, but rely on their goodwill. External examiners consequently do not have to accept the examination format prescribed by institutions, but can negotiate conditions that better suit their ideas about examination. So, next time I am asked to be an external examiner, I plan on sending the university concerned a list of conditions. Here is a first draft of what I'll be asking for:
Examiners' identities should be public. Examiners and the student should know in advance who all the examiners are.
Examiners' reports should be public. The student and each of the examiners should be provided with a copy of all the examiners' reports and marks.
Right of reply. The student should have a right (and should be encouraged) to reply to the examiners' reports (even if only by writing a short paragraph).
These are really very minimal requirements that would do little to change the (sometimes arbitrary) way power is exercised in how postgraduate students are evaluated. However, it would go some way towards turning it into more of a collaborative learning experience. In the past I have, for example, very rarely had the opportunity of seeing (and learning from) other examiners' reports.
posted by Martin on Thursday, March 20, 2003Disinfopedia
They describe themselves as "a collaborative project to produce a directory of public relations firms, think tanks, industry-funded organizations, and industry-friendly experts that work to influence public opinion on behalf of corporations, governments and special interests." A bit like the much bigger Wikipedia, but with a much more specific focus.
posted by Martin on Monday, March 17, 2003