With regard to the examination scripts exemption, as far as I am aware, at universities, both internal and external examiners' comments are not exempted, nor are comments about identifiable candidates made at examination boards.  One consequence of that has been that examiners are discouraged from making the type of colourful comments occasionally to be found on scripts of yesteryear (e.g. "somewhere a village is missing its idiot"). In most cases, the identify of both internal and external examiners will also be known to students - although not necessarily which examiner made specific comments.

The most obvious justification is to stop students from seeking to have their work marked by alternative assessors, in the event that they are unhappy with their marks - certainly I have been witness to just such an attempt at an educational institution (not my current one) - although in that case the candidate was somewhat deflated by the fact that their demand to have their paper re-marked by an examiner from "a reputable university - University X" (a comment that went down really well at their home institution)  was met by the response that the external examiner was from University X and they also thought the script was a clear fail.  That having been said, I can't see universities (or others) being inclined to place much weight on a re-assessment of work carried out by a candidate's own hand-picked 'expert', and likely out of the context of the course in which it was submitted.  I suppose it might depend upon whether the academic discipline is one in which there are objectively 'right answers' to exam papers, as opposed to disciplines in which the quality of answers is a more subjective opinion.

Given the university fees currently charged, and the job-market pressure on students to obtain 2:1 degrees and above, if such a rule were not in place, I think we might be seeing a significant rise in demands of this sort -  it seems to me that there has been a definite rise in 'special circumstances' claims, and appeals against degree classifications.  That having been said, as assessment is increasingly carried out throughout the year, rather than just as end-of-year examinations; and feedback on assessment (both written and verbal) is considerably more detailed than when I was a student; then it is arguable that most students remain unlikely to wish to seek access to scripts.  ..

On a pragmatic note, the use of the exemption is optional, and it may well be that permitting a student to see their script (if not to take a copy away with them) may well head off a more extended (and expensive) dispute.

Best wishes

Andrew
 

On 29 April 2014 13:53, Roland Perry <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

In message <F92A3244DD8F86438C10098DDCB2A[log in to unmask]buckscc.gov.uk>, at 10:55:37 on Mon, 28 Apr 2014, "Baines, Jonathan" <[log in to unmask]> writes

As we all know, para 9 of Sch 7 to DPA 98 exempts examination scripts from subject access rights. A few of us have been having a twitter conversation about why that exemption exists. The only answer we?re coming up with is that from disclosures of exam scripts one could accurately remember/infer the exam question, and some examining bodies reuse/recycle their questions.

Don't they publish the "past papers" for public exams any more. When I was at school we had piles of old A-level which were used for setting homework, and I'm petty sure the University published past Tripos papers too.

Brief searches of Hansard haven?t come up with much ? does anyone have any other knowledge/theories? It?s always struck me as a bit unfair and arbitrary

I've always understood it's to keep any comments made by an examiner private (to the examiner/board) and to preserve the anonymity of the examiner doing the marking.
--
Roland Perry

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
     available to the world wide web community at large at
     http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
    If you wish to leave this list please send the command
      leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
             data-protection-request@jiscmail.ac.uk
 Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
       To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
        SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
  (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

--

Andrew Charlesworth

Reader in IT and Law

Director, Centre for IT and Law

Bristol Law School/Department of Computer Science

University of Bristol

Wills Memorial Building

Queens Road, Bristol BS8 1RJ

Tel: 0117 954 5355

Fax: 0117 954 5124

E-mail: [log in to unmask]

---

All archives of messages are stored permanently and are available to the world wide web community at large at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html

Selected commands (the command has been filled in below in the body of the email if you are receiving emails in HTML format):

• Leaving this list: send leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
• Suspending emails from all JISCMail lists: send SET * NOMAIL to [log in to unmask]
• To receive emails from this list in text format: send SET data-protection NOHTML to [log in to unmask]
• To receive emails from this list in HTML format: send SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]

All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm and are sent in the body of an otherwise blank email to [log in to unmask]

Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner [log in to unmask]

(Please send all commands to [log in to unmask] not the list or the moderators, and all requests for technical help to [log in to unmask], the general office helpline)

---