03-10-2008, 01:52 PM
BedfordBoy Wrote:One of my colleagues who will be sitting the exam in the UK, but who has obtained almost all his experience abroad, has got me wondering about the exam marking process - specifically who marks the papers and how do they maintain consistency between markers?
Also, are all the papers sent to London for marking?
If they are, how are candidates marked who have answered the papers based on their own local signalling principles and equipment?
If they are not, how does the IRSE make sure it isn't easier to pass in one country than in another?
Does anyone here have any insight as to the process, or any other thoughts?
Examiners know if a student is sitting the exam abroad from the style of candidate number; your colleage MUST make it very clear on ALL their answers which practice they are familiar with- the default for someone who has failed to specify but is sitting in the UK would obviously be UK. This would be wrong in the case of your colleague- but would be their fault as all candidates are always advised to state!
This is what I believe from knowing many of the examiners, most of whom are from the UK, generally engineers in their 30s/40s/50s/60s. Papers are marked independently by 2 examiners; often there are only 2 examiners per module so both mark all papers; in other cases 3 examiners are used, of which 2 mark any one paper but in all combinations. The separate marks are compared and if the marks differ wildly or close to a grade boundary are discussed and re-evaluated as necessary. I believe that the whole exam committee then meet to discuss overall perormance in the various modules. It is IRSE Council that authorise the publication of the results, generally at a committee meeting mid December.
I believe that all papers are sent to London and then the copies sent out to the various examiners. Actually a candidate from abroad in my opinion may have a higher chance of "getting away with something" than a domestic candidate. If what they declare as their practice sounds feasible and self consistent then it probably won't be challenged; if it seems odd then the onus is on the examiners to take advice from some member off the IRSE or other appropriate person who does have knowledge that could confirm that the suspect answer is actually correct for that environment.
Nothing is perfect but I believe that the marking is as fair as it can be; I would actually have greater concerns about the questions. I know that the questions are now reviewed by a non native speaker and also with special consideration from those with a non UK background. However I'd find it hard to assert that there is no unconscious bias, but I do think that the IRSE does what is reasonable, given the current membership of the Institution and the students puttting themselves forward for examination.
An example where it is really impracticable to improve but things are not ideal is that module 3 Control Tables are always on a layout that is definitely very UK Mainline (and actually often very 1970s/1980s)- it must be hard if answering for an environment that is very different and based on different assumptions- a candidates local practice may not fit the situation at all, as that form of track layout just wouldn't exist. Having said that, many candidates ask why the IRSE won't prescribe one set of standards and one design of Control Table- you can't have it both ways!
The reality is that all those that sit the exam are English speakers even if not all have English as their first language. Most also either work abroad for the UK railway or work on a railway where UK has had historically a significant influence. Although the IRSE strives to get "foreign" papers at meetings, conferences, conventions and IRSE News and I feel actually does very well at this, there is inevitably a "home" bias just by weight of membership. I deliberately tried to get international input for module 2 Study Pack- got some useful input from Australia but various attempts to get something from the Netherlands (close neighbour, some great similarities some significant differences, widespread English) for example proved unsuccessful.
Hope your colleague passes and next year will be able to contribute their experience to this Forum and perhaps YM events that are in the initial planning phase!
PJW