University exams are crucial in shaping students’ academic journeys, serving not only as a measure of knowledge but also as a source of feedback, an incentive for deeper study, and a means to develop critical skills needed for future challenges. However, the way exams are organized—particularly the number of retakes allowed—can significantly impact student performance.
In a recent IZA discussion paper, Massimiliano Bratti, Silvia Granato, and Enkelejda Havari provide new evidence on the effects of reducing the number of exam retakes at university. Their research examines a policy change introduced in 2010 at the Faculty of Economics of the University of Bologna, which reduced the number of allowed exam retakes per subject per year from six to three.
Challenges for higher education in Italy
In Italy, students enjoy considerable freedom in managing their university studies, with an average of five or more exam attempts per subject each year. They can also decline an exam grade and retake it. Despite these flexible arrangements, Italy faces challenges: it has lower continuation rates in higher education, high university dropout rates, and prolonged graduation times compared to most OECD countries. In fact, Italy ranks near the bottom of the OECD for the percentage of the population aged 24–35 with a university degree, at just 29.2%. This context makes it an ideal setting to explore whether reducing student flexibility in exam retakes, in line with international practices, can improve academic outcomes.
The Faculty of Economics at the University of Bologna aimed to address this issue by revising its exam policies. For example, in the United States, retakes are generally not allowed; in the United Kingdom, students typically have only two attempts; and in Sweden, students are usually limited to three attempts per academic year—similar to the new policy in Bologna. This policy change provided an opportunity to study how limiting exam retakes affects student performance.
The researchers compared the performance of students in degree programs that adopted the new rules (those in the Faculty of Economics) with those in programs that did not. They found that the reform led to significant improvements in first-year student outcomes. The probability of first-year dropout decreased by 4.2 percentage points (pp), while students earned an average of 11.2 additional credits and passed about one more exam.
No negative effect on grades
Looking at a longer time horizon, the study also documented a 5.7 pp (7%) increase in the probability of graduation and a 9.1 pp (22%) increase in on-time graduation. Remarkably, the faster degree completion did not negatively affect students’ final graduation marks, which was a major concern for many.
Further analysis based on family background, specifically whether students attended a vocational track in secondary education, revealed that those from lower socio-economic backgrounds—who were more likely to be working—benefited significantly from the reform.
Overall, the study suggests that revising how university exams are organized can be an effective policy tool to improve educational outcomes and address the long-standing issue of prolonged graduation times for Italian university students.