The trouble with resits …

In the criterion‐based clinical assessment context, and more broadly, examination resits continue to present an ongoing dilemma to educators. The number of students involved is generally a small percentage of the cohort, but it is precisely with these students that institutions bear a heavy responsibility in ensuring they reach a sufficiently high standard of performance, and are accurately assessed. The students must be given a “fair” opportunity to reach the appropriate standard(s), but at the same time, especially when clinical skills are being assessed, the public must be protected from incompetent practitioners. However, this creates a delicate tension for institutions since resits present an additional financial burden, and student failures adversely effect external funding. This paper investigates and compares the main clinical assessment and resit profiles of students in two medical schools, each of which employs a different standard setting methodology. The analysis demonstrates that resit students improve their performance by a substantial amount; this finding applies across all undergraduate clinical levels. The key issue under investigation is whether resits, as currently constituted, offer an unfair advantage to the resit student. In essence, are resits are too easy?