Congrats to the OP with the successful appeal of this case!
I just want to add that I recently went through a very similar remediation process at my med school, and I actually thought it was very fair. Your school's policy sounds nearly identical to mine - however, from how you presented the case, it sounds like they 1) didn't properly inform you of the procedure and 2) may have asked questions beyond the scope of your essays.
My school's curriculum is divided into four 10-week blocks with 8 weeks of class, 1 week of testing, and 1 week called the "special studies" week. Our testing week includes a clinical skills exam, an 8-hour essay exam based on patient cases we've encountered throughout the block, and a 200 question MCQ (a portion of which is an anatomy and histo practical). A student who fails any 1 of these exams must remediate the exam during "special studies week." Students who pass get the week off. Failing 2 or more exams is an automatic block failure and the entire block must be remediated over the summer.
A score below 75% on the MCQ exam is considered failing. Students who get between 70-75% must identify 3 areas they had difficulty in, write detailed essays on each topic, and discuss the content of the essays in an oral exam with faculty members designated by the student. Students with below a 70% take a completely new 200 question exam. If the remediation attempt is unsuccessful, the student fails the block and has to remediate the entire block over the summer. If a student fails 2 blocks in a year, he/she is placed on academic probation and faces a dismissal hearing - they usually won't be dismissed, but may have to repeat the year.
I scored a 73%, so I fell into the first category. I met with an assigned advisor who explained the entire remediation process to me. I reviewed my exam and chose 3 essay topics: fetal development in the 3rd and 4th weeks; origin, insertion, innervation, action, and blood supply of the 17 muscles that attach to the scapula; and the major arterial branches of the upper limb from the subclavian to the radial/ulnar arteries. I had 5 days to complete the essays, and then met with two professors for the oral exam. I was expected to know all of the material I put in the essays (which I don't think is unreasonable considering that I wrote them) and they questioned me for about an hour on the various topics I covered. I did well and passed the exam.
I'm only posting this because so many people on here seem to think this remediation process is ridiculous and completely unfair. I actually thought it was great; I think that writing an essay and then explaining the material you should already be familiar with is a much better way to evaluate a student's knowledge than a multiple-choice exam. I definitely preferred remediating with this method as opposed to retaking the entire exam because I didn't have to re-study the 90+ lectures our exam was based on - I only had to study areas I felt uncomfortable with. It gave me the opportunity to identify my weaknesses and re-tackle them in a comprehensive way. I also got to spend the majority of the special studies week relaxing with only 3 essays to write as opposed to extensive studying of every lecture we'd covered. My school requires students with below a 70% to retake the entire exam because it is more likely that they have more than a few problem areas.
Sorry for the excessively long post, I just wanted to point out that this method of remediation can be very fair when administered appropriately. I obviously don't know the details behind how the process was explained to the OP, but no school should initiate a remediation process without fully explaining the procedure to the student IN WRITING. The oral exam should only cover material that the student explicitly covered in his/her essay (if the essay was written in appropriate detail).
To the OP: hope everything goes well for you and good luck for the rest of the year!
