Continuous Internal Assessment and the Semester Pattern
Chapter Thirty-Nine
Syllabus topic 3, "Examination reforms"
Pages 140 to 142 of 543
In one line
Continuous internal assessment gives part of every paper's marks to work done during the semester and marked by the college, and at MU that part is either twenty-five marks in a hundred or forty in a hundred, depending on the scheme.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: continuous internal assessment is the assessment of a student's work during the course of instruction by the teaching institution, as distinct from the terminal examination conducted by the University; rule 12 of the Rules of Legal Education 2008 requires the marks of a paper to be divided between the end semester examination and the internal work of the semester, and the University of Mumbai applies this through the 75:25 and 60:40 patterns, under which twenty-five or forty marks in each hundred are awarded internally.
What the pattern actually is
A paper of a hundred marks is split. Seventy-five marks are the University's written examination at the end of the semester and twenty-five are the college's internal assessment; or sixty and forty on the other pattern.
The reader has been assessed this way throughout. MU's law courses run on these patterns, and the notation appears on the University's own documents.
The internal component is the college's. It is set, conducted and marked inside the institution, and the University records the figure.
And it is not optional. Rule 12 requires the division; a college that awards a hundred marks on the terminal paper alone is not following the Rules.
What the reform was meant to fix
Read it against the nine defects of chapter 350 and the design becomes clear.
It attacks the concentration defect. A year is no longer decided in three hours, because part of the mark is already banked.
It attacks the feedback defect. Work marked during the semester can be returned while the course is still running.
It attacks the sampling defect. Internal work can cover topics the terminal paper will not reach.
It attacks the skill defect, and this is the important one. Drafting, mooting, presenting and researching cannot be examined in a three hour paper but can be assessed internally, which is why rule 12 is what makes every method in topic 2 possible.
And it attacks the direction defect. Students prepare for what carries marks, so moving marks moves effort.
What has gone wrong with it in practice
Marks for attendance. The commonest failure. Internal marks awarded for turning up assess presence, not learning, and convert the reform into a bonus.
Uniformly high marks. Where a college's average internal mark is close to the maximum, the component is not discriminating and has no assessment content at all.
No comparability. Twenty-five internal marks at one college and twenty-five at another are not the same quantity, which damages the certification and selection purposes of chapter 340 and is the strongest objection to the whole reform.
Continuous Internal Assessment and the Semester Pattern
Favouritism and pressure. A teacher who awards internal marks to students they will teach again is exposed to pressure that an anonymous external examiner is not.
No feedback anyway. An internal test marked and never returned with comments delivers the frequency without the benefit, which is continuous testing rather than continuous assessment.
And the workload is real. Internal assessment done properly is the most time-expensive thing a teacher does, and where staffing is short it is the first thing to be reduced to a formality.
What makes it work
Assess something the terminal paper cannot. A moot, a drafting exercise, a research exercise, a presentation, a viva. If the internal component is a smaller written examination, the reform has bought nothing.
Publish the scheme in advance. Students should know at the start of the semester exactly what the twenty-five marks are for.
Return the work with comments, since feedback is half the point.
Spread the component. Three pieces of eight marks each is better than one of twenty-five, because it samples more and forgives one bad week.
Moderate internally. A second teacher looking at a sample of the marks addresses both inconsistency and pressure.
And keep a record. Where marks can be explained by reference to a piece of work and a scheme, most of the objections above lose their force.
The honest assessment for an answer
The reform is correctly aimed and unevenly delivered. Its design answers five of the nine defects of the traditional examination, and its practice in many colleges answers none of them, because the marks are given for attendance.
And the diagnosis is not that teachers are lazy. It is the pattern of chapter 330: a method or an assessment that requires teacher hours the college does not have will be reduced to whatever can be done in the hours available. Rule 11 and Schedule III are therefore a precondition of rule 12 working, which is the connection worth making.
A worked example
Two colleges, same paper, same 75:25 pattern.
College A awards its twenty-five marks as: five for attendance, twenty for one internal written test on the first half of the syllabus. The test is marked and not returned. Almost every student scores between eighteen and twenty-three.
College B publishes at the start of the semester that the twenty-five marks are: eight for a moot, eight for a drafting exercise of the kind Schedule II requires, and nine for a research exercise with a written answer. All three are returned with comments within a fortnight. Marks range from nine to twenty-four.
Continuous Internal Assessment and the Semester Pattern
Both colleges comply with rule 12 on paper. Only College B has changed anything, and the difference costs no money at all, only teacher time and a decision.
Now ask the certification question. A student with twenty-two from College A and one with twenty-two from College B do not have the same thing, and the University records the same number. That is the objection to internal assessment stated at its strongest, and an answer should state it rather than avoid it.
Distinctions
| University examination | Internal assessment | |
|---|---|---|
| Who sets and marks it | The University, externally | The college, internally |
| When | At the end of the semester | During the semester |
| Anonymous | Yes | No |
| Comparable across colleges | Yes | No |
| Can assess skill | No | Yes |
| Gives feedback | No | It should, and often does not |
| MU's share | 75 or 60 | 25 or 40 |
Quick revision
Rule 12 requires the marks of a paper to be divided between the end semester examination and the semester's internal work; MU applies 75:25 and 60:40.
It answers five defects of the traditional examination: concentration, feedback, narrow sampling, inability to assess skill, and direction.
Five failures in practice: marks for attendance; uniformly high marks; no comparability across colleges; exposure to favouritism and pressure; and frequency without feedback.
Six things that make it work: assess what the terminal paper cannot; publish the scheme in advance; return work with comments; spread the component across pieces; moderate internally; and keep a record.
The precondition: rule 11 and Schedule III, because an assessment needing teacher hours a college does not have will be reduced to a formality.
Test yourself
1. State MU's two patterns and what the internal share is used for. 75:25 and 60:40, so that twenty-five or forty marks in each hundred are set, conducted and marked by the college during the semester, the rest being the University's terminal written examination.
2. Which defects of the traditional examination does continuous internal assessment answer? Concentration of a year into three hours, absence of feedback, narrow sampling of the syllabus, inability to assess practical skill, and the direction of student effort, since marks move effort.
3. Give the strongest single objection to internal assessment. That twenty-five internal marks at one college and twenty-five at another are not the same quantity, so the component is not comparable, which damages both the certification and the selection purposes while the University records the same figure for both students.
4. Name three practical measures that answer the objections. Publishing the marking scheme at the start of the semester; assessing something the terminal paper cannot, such as a moot, a drafting exercise or a research exercise; and internal moderation by a second teacher over a sample of the marks.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.