This paper conducts a statistical analysis of all final year module results at the Faculty of Laws of University College London in the main 2025 assessment period. The principal assessment methods used (with various percentage weightings for different modules) were: (i) in person, ‘closed-book’, timed written exams; (ii) in person oral exams; and (iii) ‘open-book’ essays. The research objective was to determine whether choice of exam format had any effect on outcomes and/or impact on equality, diversity and inclusion (as to which, possible concerns had been raised by staff and students). The available equalities markers in the Faculty of Laws’ data were gender and ‘Access UCL’ status, namely students admitted under a contextual offer scheme for UK-domiciled applicants from underrepresented groups at UCL. The methodology used was to run regressions on the data using Excel, controlling for various factors and interactions. The main findings and research outcomes were that, controlling for demographics, a higher percentage of grade assessed by written exams was associated with a lower grade outcome (significant at the 0.1 level). A 10 percentage point increase in written exam weighting was associated with a 0.4 point decline in overall grade. Controlling for assessment method, female candidates obtained a higher grade outcome by 1.1 points (significant at the 5% level) and ‘Access UCL’ students obtained a lower grade outcome by 1.5 points (significant at the 0.1% level). No significant interactions between demographics and assessment methods were observed.

Authors:
Joshua Folkard, University College London, United Kingdom

---

Conference Comments & Feedback

Place a comment using your LinkedIn profile

Comments

Share on activity feed

Post with LinkedIn

Powered by WP LinkPress

Share this Presentation

Share this...

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin

Posted by James Alexander Gordon

Last updated: 2023-02-23 23:45:00

All Posts