Toilet visit renders Tilburg exam invalid
A master's student says the invigilator allowed her to go to the toilet, but the examination board upheld the rule that she had to be accompanied.
The exam of a master's psychology student at Tilburg University was declared invalid after she went to the toilet during the test. She says she had been given permission; the examination board said she had left the room unaccompanied.
The incident took place on 5 June during the Old Age Psychology exam. According to Univers, around thirty students were in the room and one invigilator was present. After an hour and a half, the student asked to go to the toilet. Because there was no second invigilator to accompany her, she initially had to wait.
When the second invigilator had still not appeared after fifteen minutes, the student asked for permission again. She says the invigilator present agreed that she could go alone. She returned within a few minutes and completed the exam. Afterwards, an official report was drawn up.
According to Univers, the report stated that it could no longer be established whether the student had completed the exam independently. Her written response was reportedly initially overlooked. The examination board then stood by its decision to declare the exam invalid.
Tilburg University’s rules state that toilet visits during written exams are permitted only in exceptional circumstances and under supervision. The university writes that several invigilators must be present or that a relief invigilator must be available. The rules are intended to prevent students from contacting others or using aids during a break.
The case therefore concerns two responsibilities. Students must know the examination rules and follow instructions. At the same time, an educational institution must ensure that its own procedure is workable, especially when an invigilator gives permission that does not correspond to the formal rule.
The student has since sat the resit and passed it, meaning that according to Univers her studies are complete apart from an internship. The examination board gave no substantive response on the individual case. Tilburg University does state in its general rules that an official report is drawn up when irregularities are suspected and that the examination board then decides.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The examination board declared the exam invalid.
- The student says she was given permission to go to the toilet alone.
- Tilburg University requires toilet visits to be supervised.
- The student later passed the resit.
Left
Arguments Students should not suffer because of organisational errors or contradictory instructions from staff. In such a case, an institution should allow for individual circumstances and assess whether the sanction is proportionate.
Values Equal treatment, accessibility and protection against institutional power imbalances.
Consequences A more flexible arrangement could protect students, but would require additional staff and could increase disputes over exceptions.
Centre
Arguments Examination rules are necessary for reliable assessment, but they must be clear and workable. When a formal rule conflicts with a verbal instruction, an independent committee must carefully weigh all the circumstances.
Values Legal certainty, reliability and good governance.
Consequences Clearer protocols and better record-keeping could prevent both fraud and unjustified sanctions.
Right
Arguments An exam result has value only if the same integrity rules apply to everyone. Students are responsible for knowing the rules, even when an exception is inconvenient.
Values Consistency in applying rules, responsibility and a level playing field among students.
Consequences Strict enforcement protects the value of qualifications, but can have harsh consequences when supervision or communication falls short.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The text clearly distinguishes between the student’s account and Tilburg University’s formal rules. The key facts come from a journalistic report and official university information.
- confirmed The exam of a master's psychology student was declared invalid after she went to the toilet. — Reported by Univers; the university gave no substantive response on the individual case. source
- confirmed The Old Age Psychology exam took place on 5 June 2026. — Mentioned in Univers’s report. source
- confirmed Tilburg University permits toilet visits during an exam only in exceptional circumstances and under supervision. — Stated in Tilburg University’s official examination rules. source
- confirmed The student later passed the resit. — Reported by Univers. source
Editor's note
The individual account comes from Univers; Tilburg University confirms the general rule on supervised toilet visits. The invigilator’s permission is the student’s account and has not been independently established.Sources
- Plassen tijdens een tentamen? Ik moest naar de wc, kreeg toestemming en toch werd mijn tentamen ongeldig verklaard — Univers
- Tentamens — Tilburg University
- Motivering College van Beroep voor de Examens — Universiteit van Amsterdam
More on this in Dutch media
- RTL Nieuws — „onderwijs tentamen”
- NOS — „onderwijs tentamen”
- Het Parool — „onderwijs tentamen”