Exam inspection / examiners

If you failed an entrance exam, you can request to see your marked work. To do so, you have to contact the examiner who marked your exam. You can find the examiner's name at the bottom of the result letter. The email addresses at which the examiners can be reached are listed below.

Candidates have different expectations about what an inspection is. Sometimes candidates are disappointed because the inspection did not correspond to what they wanted. This disappointment can regularly be traced back to a number of misunderstandings about the inspection.
The contractor expects the candidate to be sufficiently informed if he / she has been able to compare his work with the standard results. The candidate, on the other hand, sometimes expects to have ample opportunity to engage in an in-depth discussion of the way the work has been reviewed and expects to increase his mark.
Therefore, a few comments to avoid disappointments.

An inspection is primarily intended to check what you have done wrong in case of doubt. We assume that the level of the candidate is sufficient to understand the standard solutions, so that no explanation is necessary during an inspection. Inspection is not a form of tutoring. A examiner rarely has time to go through the exam with you in detail. Make sure you prepare well for the inspection. If possible, make the exercises again at home and, if possible, compare them with a solution. (If there is no solution of the entrance exam, you cannot request it.)

Nor is an inspection an additional oral exam. If it is not clear from what you have written down during the exam that you know the answer on the question, then an oral explanation afterwards does not change your mark. The same applies to answers without explanation; an answer without explanation does not yield any points, and that explanation must be given during the exam and it must be clear from what you have written.

An inspection is also not a negotiation process in which, in consultation an expert and appointed and authorized to determine the mark. If there is a difference of opinion, the examiner decides and in principle the discussion is closed.

The above may sound a bit unfriendly. But it is mainly intended to avoid disappointments beforehand when candidates come with the main goal of getting a higher mark. We also do not want to discourage anyone from seeing their work. Sometimes you can learn from it if you prepare well in advance.

You may take notes during the inspection, but we do not provide a copy of your work. And we never send copies. We also never send answers to the questions. That means you always have to come by yourself. And in principle, only the candidate himself has access to the inspection.


Centrale Commissie Voortentamen Biologie

Biology

  
dr. E.N.T.P. Bakker n.t.bakker@amc.uva.nl Universiteit van Amsterdam
mw. drs. S.K. van Beekhuizen skvanbeekhuizen@gmail.com Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
dr. R.A. Brooimans r.brooimans@erasmusmc.nl Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
drs. C.W.M. Meffert c.w.m.meffert@vu.nl Vrije Universiteit/Acta
mw. dr. K. Smits kim.smits@maastrichtuniversity.n Universiteit Maastricht
mw. drs. A.E. Storm aestorm@gmail.com Universiteit Leiden
mw. drs. A. Valkman valkman@prosycon.com Universiteit Utrecht
dr. M. Zegers mirjam.zegers@radboudumc.nl Radboud Universiteit
     

Centrale Commissie Voortentamen Natuurkunde

Physics

  
prof. dr. H. van Amerongen herbert.vanamerongen@wur.nl Wageningen Universiteit
prof. dr. ir. W.H. Backes w.backes@mumc.nl Universiteit Maastricht
mw. dr. S.M. Chita s.m.chita@vu.nl Vrije Universiteit/Acta
dr. P. Forbes p.forbes@erasmusmc.nl Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
drs. R.P. Form rob.form@ccvx.nl Universiteit Utrecht
ir. J.E. van der Laan j.e.van.der.laan@rug.nl Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
drs. M. Mollema martinmollema@gmail.com Universiteit Leiden
dr. ir. H.C.J. Mulders h.c.j.mulders@tue.nl Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
drs. R.P. Form secretaris@ccvx.nl Technische Universiteit Delft
dr. ir. G.J. Streekstra g.j.streekstra@amc.uva.nl Universiteit van Amsterdam
dr. M.P. Zwiers m.zwiers@donders.ru.nl Radboud Universiteit
     

Centrale Commissie Voortentamen Scheikunde

Chemistry

  
dr. A.A. Bominaar a.a.bominaar@o2g2.nl Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
mw. dr. ir. J. Diederen julia.diederen@wur.nl Wageningen Universiteit
dr. F. Hochstenbach f.hochstenbach@amc.uva.nl Universiteit van Amsterdam
dr. R.R. Koenen r.koenen@maastrichtuniversity.nl Universiteit Maastricht
mw. dr. M.J. den Otter m.j.denotter@TUdelft.nl Technische Universiteit Delft
mw. dr. H. Pluk helma.pluk@radboudumc.nl Radboud Universiteit
drs. P. van Rossum p.van.rossum@vu.nl Vrije Universiteit/Acta
drs. M.D. Stevens tijn.stevens@xs4all.nl Universiteit Leiden
mw. G.M. Tiemersma g.m.tiemersma@umcutrecht.nl Universiteit Utrecht
dr. A.J.M. Verhoeven a.verhoeven@erasmusmc.nl Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
     

Centrale Commissie Voortentamen Wiskunde

Mathematics A & B

  
drs. H. Bakker h.bakker.marum@kpnmail.nl Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
dr. ir. S. Dommers s.dommers@tue.nl Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
dr. A.R.T. Donders rogier.donders@radboudumc.nl Radboud Universiteit
drs. R.P. Form rob.form@ccvx.nl Universiteit Utrecht
mw. drs. I.A.M. Goddijn i.a.m.goddijn@tudelft.nl Technische Universiteit Delft
dr. R.J. Kooman kooman@math.leidenuniv.nl Universiteit Leiden
dr. H.A. Marquering h.a.marquering@amc.uva.nl Universiteit van Amsterdam
drs. C.W.M. Meffert c.w.m.meffert@vu.nl Vrije Universiteit/Acta
dr. ir. J.J.M. Pel j.pel@erasmusmc.nl Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
J.H.W. van der Put vanderputjohn4@gmail.com Universiteit Maastricht
mw. ir. M. Wilminkova maria.wilminkova@wur.nl Wageningen Universiteit