Dear University of Warwick,

I'm writing to request an interview score sheet or report form that was used to score the applicants in their MMI for the 2020 entry cycle.

Yours faithfully,

J Levy

infocompliance, Resource, University of Warwick

Thank you for your email which has been received by the University's
Information and Data Compliance Team. 
The University undertakes to respond to Freedom of Information Requests
within 20 working days and to Data Subject Rights Requests within one

If your query is not related to a Freedom of Information Request or Data
Subject Rights Request, but is related to a data protection
matter, please redirect it to [1][email address].

Kind regards

Information and Data Compliance Team.


*Please note that due to the global Covid-19 pandemic, the University of
Warwick is following the advice of the UK Government and where possible
staff are working from home. New working arrangements coupled with the
prioritisation of university resources may impact upon the University’s
ability to respond to your request within the statutory timescales and you
may experience delays when making information rights requests during the
pandemic. Thank you for your patience during these unprecedented times.


Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

infocompliance, Resource, University of Warwick

Dear Mr Levy,

Thank you for submitting an FOI request, requesting information from the University of Warwick. In order to comply with your request, we would be grateful if you could please clarify the following:

• Please could you provide us with your full name

Please be advised that the University will be unable to proceed with your request until you have provided the requested clarifications and the 20 working day statutory time limit does not begin until clarification has been received. Should we not receive a reply to this email, your request will be closed in 20 working days.

Kind Regards

Information and Data Compliance Team

This message is sent in confidence for the addressee only.  It may contain privileged information.  The contents are not to be disclosed to anyone other than the addressee.  Unauthorised recipients must preserve this confidentiality and should please advise the sender immediately of the error in transmission.

show quoted sections

infocompliance, Resource, University of Warwick

J Levy


Thank you for your email dated 10 May 2020 requesting information from the
University of Warwick under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Please
find below your request and the University’s response.

“I'm writing to request an interview score sheet or report form that was
used to score the applicants in their MMI for the 2020 entry cycle”.

The University declines to disclose any details of its scoring and
assessment methods since it considers that the exemption under section
43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 applies. Section 43(2) states
that “information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act
would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any
person (including the public authority holding it)”.  The University
considers that the release of the requested information would be likely to
prejudice the commercial interests of the University.

Applications to medicine are competitive and in each year the WMS MB ChB
programme receives over 1500 applications for 193 places.  Applicants
successful in our shortlisting process are invited to attend our Multi
Mini Interview process (MMI). Approximately 450 candidates will each take
part in six MMI stations which have been designed to assess the following
competencies: team working, Insight, Resilience, Communication, Empathy,
Probity, Respect and dignity.  Candidates are observed and scored (on a
descriptive categorical scale) on the exercises by trained assessors
including medical professionals, academics and lay people with an interest
in medical education. All assessors are blind to the numerical scoring
system to ensure use of the full scale of scores. Scores for each exercise
are combined and applicants achieving the highest total score will be made
an offer.  Disclosing the scoring system would jeopardise the integrity of
our process, bias assessors judgements and risks advantaging those
candidates with a greater knowledge of the selection process.

The University considers that the release of the requested information
would prejudice the University’s commercial interests since disclosing
this information would reveal the University’s selection process which
could be used by other institutions to their own commercial advantage. In
addition, disclosure would undermine the selection process and would
prejudice the ability of the University to select the best applicants in
an objective manner. The MBChB programme is rigorous and challenging, and
it is important that the selection procedure is capable of identifying
those who are best equipped to study Medicine and face the challenges of
the medical profession therefore the importance of the section process
cannot be underestimated.


Disclosure of the scoring system used is likely to result in an
application and selection process that does not have validity because it
would create an unfair process as it would provide those candidates with
greater knowledge and understanding of the application and selection
process with the ability to score more highly than those who were better
qualified and had the appropriate qualities to succeed as a doctor but
were unaware of the selection process. Disclosure would also result in
assessors having sight of the numerical scoring system that sits behind
the descriptive system that they currently use; this will adversely alter
assessor judgements.


The exemption at section 43(2) is a qualified exemption which means that
the University must consider whether the public interest in maintaining
the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The University
considers there is no overriding public interest in the circumstances that
would warrant prejudicing the University’s commercial interests.
Disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act is effectively disclosure
to the general public at large, not solely the person who has made the
request. The University is of the opinion that the public interest lies in
favour of withholding the requested information.


If you are dissatisfied with the way in which your request has been
handled you can request an internal review within one month of our
response and, in the first instance, you are advised to follow the
procedure outlined here:

If you remain dissatisfied with how your request has been handled, you
have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at: The Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Walter Lane, Wilmslow, and
Cheshire, SK9 5AF (0303 123 1113) ([2] There is no
charge for making an appeal.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Rowley
Ian Rowley | Director of Development, Comms & External Affairs| External
University House | University of Warwick | Coventry | CV4 8UW



Visible links