How do candidates with extra time perform?
With sufficient Career Progression Gateway projects under our belts, we have been able to turn our attention to the stats and review how candidates with additional needs and extra time have performed overall. By reviewing the data we could work out if having extra time was providing the right sort of help.
We looked at candidates from four different FRS, completing assessments from Crew to Station Manager. The data set is small, with only 1-2% of total candidates tending to request the provision of additional time.
We looked at the average score of all other candidates, and also the range of scores in the cohort, from lowest to highest.
Of the 10 candidates who had additional time across our projects last year, six scored higher than the candidate average for their specific project, 4 scored lower. This also equates to six CPG pass marks and four unsuccessful. This is consistent with candidates without additional time provision.
‘Additional time’ candidates scored from second highest in the cohort to 12th (bottom ranking). This is useful to know in terms of there being a range of scores/ performance, and not all ‘bunched’ in one area.
It’s early days in terms of having a decent number of cases to review, but so far the results are encouraging that additional time is levelling the playing field between neurotypical and neuro-diverse candidates, which still allows for a range of performance to be demonstrated. This is further evidence that the assessment is fair, reliable and valid for all candidates.