Resits offered to students after exam complaints

Students will be given the chance to resit the exam

Second year Biomedical Science students will have the chance to resit a module exam after complaints that they had been given the wrong information about the test.

Students said  they had been told by lecturers that the exam would include 30 multiple-choice questions with pictures to label.

Instead, there were no questions with images in the exam paper.

A number of students also complained that the exam was unlike the online test they had taken last semester, despite assurances that both exams would be similar.

The department has confirmed that students will be allowed to resit the exam.

However, if students do choose to resit then their second set of marks will be counted towards the module, regardless of whether they are higher or lower than their original score.

Biomedical Science student, John Berry, 23, said that the paper was unexpected by everyone.

Berry said: “It’s better than nothing but it still doesn’t really address the original issue.

“The only difference is we at least know what to expect this time round.”

“Most people didn’t do too badly but I’m sure most of the people that decide to do it probably think it’s worth a resit, especially with the extra revision time.”

The module focused on the anatomy of the human head. The exam was worth 40 per cent of a module.

A spokesperson from the University of Sheffield said: “The department is aware of an issue with an element of the overall assessment for a Level Two anatomy module in that the questions did not match the expected format – that they would be related to images.

“Although the questions did not rely on any image content, they had been used in assessments in previous years. The more substantial element of the overall assessment did have image and specimen related questions.

“However, it was decided to allow students to re-sit the exam if they wished. Given that many students performed very well in the assessments, the retake will be optional so that the students who feel their performance was compromised will have another opportunity.”

Clarification: In the printed version of this story, Martin Cambray-Deakin is named as the module leader for this exam. This is incorrect- Mr Cambray-Deakin is the director of undergraduate studies for the department. Apologies for any inconvenience or confusion caused.

Comments

Leave a Reply

ForgeToday.com is published by Sheffield Students’ Union. Views expressed are not necessarily those of the University, the Union or the editorial team. In the first instance all complaints should be addressed to the Managing Editor, although a formal procedure exists.

All comments on ForgeToday.com are moderated before publication (or rejection). When you post a comment, it is held in a queue until we approve or reject it.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but personal attacks and defamatory comments are not acceptable.

Any complaints should be directed to the Managing Editor. Upon recieving a complaint we will remove the comment in question from view as soon as possible, so the complaint can be investigated. If a basis for complaint can be established, the comment will be permanently removed.