When I was Disability Advisor for UMIST my own department, Computation,
had a request from a dyslexic student to take his final exams orally
since he believed that he was underperforming with the traditional
examination format.
I checked with the central examinations office if this was possible and
was told that provided the departmental exam board agreed that the
approach was academically respectable and it was acceptable to the
external examiner we could go ahead. We therefore took this approach for
this student (for I believe 11 examinations out of 12).
The procedure that I devised and the department adopted was as follows
(it may be useful for others to see what we did):
* The student entered a quiet supervised room as if a standard
examination was to take place
* The student was given the standard examination paper and allowed
to make notes about the questions he wished to answer
* The examiner then entered the room after about one hour to check
if the student was ready to be oralled, if not then a further short time
was allowed to the student
* Once the student was ready then another staff member was brought
in to invigilate the process
* The examiner would ask the student which question they wanted to
answer and the student would, using any prepared notes, provide the
answer orally. If any point was unclear then the examiner would ask the
student for clarification, being careful not to give anything away. The
process would continue until the student had nothing further to say and
the examiner was satisfied that he understood the student's responses.
Another question was then dealt with in a similar manner until the
examination was over. The student never needed more time than was
allowed other students, although some thought needs to be given to this
point if this were necessary
* Once the examination was over the invigilator would ask both the
student and the examiner separately if they thought the examination was
fair and if the student had been given adequate consideration. The
examination then terminated.
Comments
* The student did perform at a level one grade higher than
previously
* The invigilator was briefed beforehand to watch carefully to
ensure that the examiner did not suggest answers or give away a correct
approach to the question being dealt with
* The whole process though successful was very person intensive,
two staff members with the student
* Because of the last point the approach could not be used for
very many students at one time, it could be used occasionally if the
need arose
* The departmental examination board and external examiners were
pleased and satisfied with the results
|