Marking identifiable scripts: following up student concerns.

Introduction: Medical student concern that the submission of named examination scripts to examiners could cause bias initiated a study on the effect of identified and de-identified scripts on assessment outcome. Methods: Data were collected from a convenience examination sample of Year 1 (n = 88 students; n = 29 questions) and Year 2 scripts (n = 75 students; n = 27 questions). Scripts were randomised for presentation to examiners with or without identification for all of a given student's work. Assessment outcomes, by year and marking condition, were a non-normal distribution. Results: Non-parametric analysis determined that there were no systematic differences in assessment outcome under the two marking conditions (MW < 0.05). Conclusion: We continue for a range of pedagogical reasons to present identified papers to examiners. Importantly, this study also demonstrates a research-led approach to resolving student queries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]