Think the Forum needs a bookshop? If you do then cut out, sign and post this coupon in one of our boxes around campus.
E xeposé Exam errors cause fury Comment page 6
Monday 23 May 2011 Issue 580 www.exepose.com
Free
Photo: Hannah Walker
ringing part way through, followed by an announcement that two multiple choice questions should be ignored. When asked about the situation, Bertie Archer, VP Academic Affairs, commented: “Mistakes should never get to this stage. The checking and scrutiny process should be much more rigorous.” Students have also faced a lack of facilities and resources. One candidate in an English exam asked for more paper, only to be given yellow un-lined paper with the date stamped in the middle. She later described the incident as giving her ‘exam rage’.
“Mistakes should never get to this stage” Bertie Archer VP Academic Affairs
Candidates have faced a range of errors during this year’s summer exam period, as well as harsher invigilating and identity checks to try to curb a rise in cheating
Henry White Editor HUNDREDS of candidates have been affected by problems during this summer’s exam period, with large numbers making formal complaints to colleges, Student Staff Liaison Committees and academic services. The Maths Algebraic Structure ECM2705 exam was so difficult the Maths SSLC has called for an investigation into the paper. One candidate
stated: “[the exam] seemed to question us on ideas we hadn’t looked at” arguing that, although the module had been clearly taught, the exam questions were different in style and beyond their understanding. Peter Ashwin, Head of Maths and Computer Science, said: “The assessment officer and external examiner signed off the paper as a fair test of the module [but] I will be discussing with colleagues as to whether the exam setting procedure can be improved.”
Problems also affected the 12 May Contract Law exam, in which the words “bought” and “sold” were mixed up, only being corrected after 40 minutes. The Accounting 2 BEA1007 exam contained various errors, including a multiple choice question with an item valued at £105, 000 that should have been £95, 000, which had to be corrected by invigilators. An Economic Principals BEE1029 exam was interrupted on several occasions after mistakes were noticed, and
on 16 and 17 May, candidates in two separate exams were asked to ignore two questions after inaccuracies were found. A Geography exam, on 16 May, was also interrupted when an invigilator’s mobile phone went off twice, and one 18 May afternoon session was interrupted five times, eventually having a question dropped altogether. Similar issues affected the Sports and Health Sciences ESS2303 assessment, including an invigilator’s phone
Candidates taking the Psychology II 2206 Methods and Stats exam had to be split into two groups so participants could access computers for part of the assessment. The computers struggled to cope with the workload and several crashed, leaving candidates rushed for time and unable to complete whole sections. In an email sent to participants afterward, Dr Cris Burgess from the Psychology Department, said: “I share your concerns and we will review the process as we do every year.” Invigilators have also been enforcing rigorous identity checks to try to combat cheating. Candidates have been searched at random to check their identity and for concealed notes. Dan Orton, a Psychology student, said, “It’s very distracting when you are mid-flow through an exam. Do they really think we are stupid enough to write up our arms?” A spokesperson for the University stated: “Delivering the best student experience is our top priority. We will ensure that there is appropriate and quick action taken to rectify matters.”