Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievement

Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 727-743

  Sadler, D Royce ^a  

^a GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Academic achievement; Continuous assessment; Fidelity; Grading; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953838725     PISSN: 02602938     EISSN: 1469297X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02602930902977756     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Brown, S., and A. Glasner, eds. 1999. Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press.
2. Bryan, C., and K. Clegg, eds. 2006. Innovative assessment in higher education. London: Routledge.
3. Calsyn, R.J. 2000. A checklist for critiquing treatment fidelity studies. Mental Health Services Research 2: 107-13.
4. Downing, S., and T. Haladyna, eds. 2006. Handbook of test development. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
5. Falchikov, N. 2005. Improving assessment through student involvement. London: Routledge- Falmer.
6. Freeman, R., and R. Lewis. 1998. Planning and implementing assessment. London: Kogan Page.
7. Hadamard, J. 1945. The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. New York: Dover.
8. Harris, D., and C. Bell. 1994. Evaluating and assessing for learning. London: Kogan Page.
9. Hopkins, K. 1998. Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. 8th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
10. Isaksson, S. 2008. Assess as you go: The effect of continuous assessment on student learning during a short course in archaeology. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33: 1-7.
11. Knight, P., ed. 1995. Assessment for learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
12. Lee, A. 2005. Flight simulation: Virtual environments in aviation. London: Ashgate.
13. Linn, R., and N. Gronlund. 2000. Measurement and assessment in teaching. 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14. Meyer, J.H.F., and R. Land. 2005. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education 49: 373-88.
15. Miller, A., B. Imrie, and K. Cox. 1998. Student assessment in higher education: A handbook for assessing performance. London: Kogan Page.
16. Reber, R., M.A. Ruch-Monachon, and W.J. Perrig. 2007. Decomposing intuitive components in a conceptual problem solving task. Consciousness and Cognition 16: 294-309.
17. Ruggiero, J.A. 2002. 'Ah Ha.' learning: Using cases and case studies to teach sociological insights and skills. Sociological Practice: A Journal of Clinical and Applied Sociology 4: 113-28.
18. Sadler, D.R. 1983. Evaluation and the improvement of academic learning. Journal of Higher Education 54: 60-79.
19. Sadler, D.R. 1987. Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education 13: 191-209.
20. Sadler, D.R. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18: 119-44.
21. Sadler, D.R. Forthcoming. Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education.
22. Scott, J.W. 2005. Academic freedom and tenure: Benedict College (South Carolina): A supplementary report on a censured administration. Academe 91, no. 1: 51-4.
23. Simon, H. 1983. Alternative visions of rationality. In Reason in human affairs, ed. H. Simon, 3-35. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (Series: Harry Camp Lectures at Stanford University, 1982). Edited and republished in Rationality in action: Contemporary approaches, 1990, ed. P.K. Moser, 189-204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Smith, R.W., and J. Kounios. 1996. Sudden insight: All-or-none processing revealed by speed-accuracy decomposition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22: 1443-62.