Handwritten and Typed (Exam) Essays:
The Impact of Format on Marks and Experience
(With CALT funding)
Anne Schlottmann, Alastair McClelland, Nando
Lewis, Leonora Marshall & Stephen Williams
Division of Psychology and Language Sciences
•   Digital natives
•   Keyboard experts
•   Typed essays fairer?
•   Perils of multi-tasking:
•   Exam takers divert cognitive resources to un-practiced task of handwriting.
•   Markers divert cognitive resources to deciphering scribbles
1

•   Markers would love typed essays
•   But students might be wary…
–   CALT project (2011) found little interest in laws pg students: only 5 of 124 took a typed exam!
•   UK university students have handwritten exams all their life
•   They have clearly done very well in this
•   It is (still) logistically difficult to arrange typed exams
•   If it ain’t broke don’t fix it
2

•   No consensus on impact of formal on marks
–   Better marks for handwritten essays (e.g. Burk & Cizek, 2006;
Arnold, Legas, Obler, Pacheco, Russell, & Umbdenstock, 1990;
Wolfe & Manolo, 2001; Breland, Lee & Muraki, 2005)
–   Better marks for typed essays (e.g. Augustine-Adams, Hendrix &
Rasband, 2001; Darus, Ismail & Ismail, 2008; Whithaus, Harrison &
Midyette, 2008),
–   No significant difference (e.g. Lee, 2004; Mogey, Paterson, Burk,
Purcell, 2010)
•   Can’t make students type exams if consequences for mark unknown
•   Real exams: Dual format. Self-selecting samples.
–   Brighter students might elect to take exams in a particular format (e.g.
Whithaus et al. 2008)
–   ESL studies (Breland et al., 2005): Typed essays higher marks, but once English language ability controlled for, handwritten exams better.
–   More emphasis on language than content in ESL exams perhaps
622859 essays
Translate into unfam lang
And on unfam keyboard
Also typing is less forgiving
To small gramm and spelling
Errors, and ESL essays more
About language than content.
3

•   Can’t make students type exams if consequences for mark unknown
•   Within subject designs
–   Mock exams with inexperienced markers (e.g., Mogey et al., 2010)
–   Lower scores for transcribed essays than for original format (e.g.
Arnold et al., 1990)
–   Different compositional processes (e.g. Hayes, 1999)
•   Few studies with university students.
•   But these are arguably the best handwritten essay exam writers.
4

•   Impact of format on marks
•   Marker and student attitude and experience
•   In context of other factors that may affect marks:
–   Marker variation
–   Essay length
–   Writing speed
–   Student ability
•   Within subjects: Each student writes 2 essays. No self selection. No transcription.
•   Mock exams within Psychology seminar system:
–   Naturalistic context: Students already write timed essays
–   Main source of formative essay feedback on BSc course
–   Experienced markers
–   About 50 networked Psychology computers. Software for typing essays in Word, while internet access, spell check etc, blocked.
Timing centrally controlled, with reminders to students, safety backups every minute.
–   “It felt surprisingly scary”
5

Participants:
• 60 Year 3 Psychology students; 13 male; 41 UK educated from A level
12 staff markers (seminar leaders); 6 male; 15 years mean marking experience
• 59 Year 2 Psychology students; 12 male; 40 UK education from A level
12 staff markers (seminar leaders); 8 male; 11 years mean marking experience
Procedure:
•   Seminar leaders/students chose topic a week+ in advance
•   Seminar leader/researcher chose question within this topic
•   Students write 1 hour timed essay, unseen question, closed-book
•   60 sec handwriting/typing speed test, questionnaires about experience of writing the essay and attitude towards typed essays
•   Format order counterbalanced between seminar groups
•   Anonymous marking
May feel that students not volunteering to participate were those who do not like typing,
However, in both samples there are another 5-10 with incomplete data where one or the
Other essay did not get written, usually because timing simply did not work out. Plus at
Least our impression was the a main factor in participation was the seminar leaders level
Year 2 markers
75%
Year 3 markers
64%
Disagree Agree
Disagree Agree
Voluntary: more neutral – thinking of the logistical difficulties
6

Year 2 mean=5.05
Year 3 mean=5.99
Negative skew qu6
Year 2
51%
58%
Year 3
Adva ntages
It would of typ ing ou
Disadva tweigh ntages rence
the disa of typ
wheth dvanta er typ tweigh
adva ges in e and-w ritten in exa ms
Qu 13
51% 21% 23%
58% 18% 23%
7

Year 2
Mark
Speed
Length
Preparation time
Ease of marking
ANCOVA adj. mark
Typed
66.2
60.2
995
2.3
6.55
67.0
Handwritten
66.4
40.9 w/min
F<1
***
745 words
2.1 hours
5.81
(1-10scale)
67.6
***
*
*
F(1,24)<1
•   Ancova with only 3 covars (speed length prep)
•   N still has format with everything:Nando: n=57
–   f x speed 4.68 p=.043
–   f x length 3.93 p=.061
–   Seminar 2.20 .06
•
Leonora no sign
Year 2
Mark
Length
Preparation time
Ease of marking
ANCOVA adj. mark
Typed
66.2
60.2
995
2.3
6.55
67.0
Handwritten
66.4
40.9 w/min
745 words
2.1 hours
5.81
(1-10scale)
67.6
F<1
***
***
*
*
F(1,24)<1
Year 3
Mark
Speed
Length
Preparation time
Ease of marking
ANCOVA adj. marks
66.8
63.1
1018
2.8
6.97
65.6
67.5
42.6 w/min
F<1
***
869 words
2.5 hours
***
*
6.08
(1-10scale)
66.3
**
F(1,23)=16.1
ANCOVA incl. exam results 65.8 66.4 F(1,22)<1
•   Ancova with only 3 covars (speed length prep
•   N still has format with everything:Nando: n=57
–   f x speed 4.68 p=.043
–   f x length 3.93 p=.061
Incl exams only 3 covars
Including sex edu
–   Seminar 2.20 .06
Forgot to take out outlier
•   Leonora n=46 (but 56 w/o markers does not change)
- attitude 5.16 .039
Ancova with only speed length and prep:
Nando 57 leonora 56
Leonora no sign hand mse 14.28 f(1,24)<1
Nando f fxs fxl 65.6 66.3 mse 9.93 f(1,23)=16.1
8

Year 2
7 Losers
Slow typists
Fast typists
Year 3
10 Losers
12 Winners
Handwritten mark
4 Winners
•   In my dreams, yes
•   At UCL Psychology, not quite
–   Students would worry about half point drop
–   But might quite like dual format exams hoping to be winners
–   It is possible to run typed exams now, for small classes, in departments with networked computers
9

•   Contextual reasons:
–   Not yet full digital natives
–   Thumbing rather than typing?
–   Schools don’t use this
–   UCL students were the top handwritten essay writers in school
•   Cognitive reasons:
–   No strategies for typing under time pressure: The revise/ restructure advantage of typing costs time
–   Speed of typing/writing or speed of thinking?
–   Really slow typists/writers are hindered
–   Really fast typists/writers seduced into an unplanned
“spew it all out” approach?
–   Markers think typed essays are shorter
–   Markers might expect more professional “like untimed” typed output
10

•   Markers and students will adapt with practice.
•   Do we wait for schools to lead this process?
•   How quickly can we change?
–   Notify markers of the illusion
–   Print essays out bigger
–   Mock essay practice for students
11