Déjà vu
The University of Law (ULaw) has been forced to void an exam — despite students having already sat it — after it emerged that the questions closely mirrored those from a past paper.
The blunder affected students sitting a short best answer question (SBAQ) contract law exam on 8 January as part of ULaw’s law conversion course.
Speaking to Legal Cheek, one student claimed that the “vast majority” of the questions had appeared on a past paper provided to students for revision purposes.
After the issue came to light following the exam, students were told that the assessment had been “reluctantly” voided and would be rescheduled for later this week, with ULaw stressing its commitment to maintaining the integrity of its assessments and apologising for the error. Several hours later, however, the law school giant was back in students’ inboxes with a second email setting out a different approach.
In that message, the uni confirmed that marks from a separate contract law exam would instead be used to determine students’ grades for the contract module. Those who felt adversely affected by the error could, however, submit mitigating circumstances and opt for a further attempt at the SBAQ later this year instead.
Some students were unimpressed by the blunder, having already revised for — and sat — the exam, only to be told that it would not count. “Not a great look for such a major institution,” one student told Legal Cheek. Others, meanwhile, are calling for the original exam to stand, arguing, among other things, that they should not have to bear the consequences of ULaw’s blunder.
A spokesperson for ULaw told Legal Cheek: “Once it became clear that the Contract Law SBAQ assessment had content with similarities to materials previously made available to students, we took immediate action to protect the integrity and fairness of the assessment process.”
They continued:
“We have sincerely apologised to students for this error and for the disruption and stress it may have caused, particularly given the time and effort invested in preparation. Our priority has been to minimise any disadvantage to students, which is why we voided the SBAQ and confirmed that no replacement assessment would be required during this exam period. We have also put clear options in place for any student who feels they have been adversely affected, including access to our procedural defect process and the opportunity to sit a further assessment where appropriate. We remain committed to listening to students’ concerns and to maintaining high standards of fairness and academic integrity in our assessments.”
(
(
