Improving marking reliability of scientific writing with the Developing Understanding of Assessment for Learning programme

Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 536-553

  Bird, Fiona L ^a   Yucel, Robyn ^a  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

feedback; inter rater reliability; marking efficiency; moderation of assessment; scientific writing

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878660801     PISSN: 02602938     EISSN: 1469297X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2012.658155     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Baird, J., Greatorex, J. and Bell, J.F. 2004. What makes marking reliable? Experiments with UK examinations. Assessment in education: Principles, policy & practice, 11: 331 - 348.
2. Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K. and Mylonas, A. 2002. Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27: 42 - 441.
3. Bitchener, J. and Knoch, U. 2009. The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31: 193 - 214.
4. Bloxham, S. 2009. Marking and moderation in the UK: False assumptions and wasted resources. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34: 209 - 220.
5. Bloxham, S. and Campbell, L. 2010. Generating dialogue in assessment feedback: Exploring the use of interactive cover sheets. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35 (3): 291 - 300.
6. Boud, D. and Falchikov, N. 2006. Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31: 399 - 413.
7. Case, S. 2007. Reconfiguring and realigning the assessment feedback processes for an undergraduate criminology degree. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32: 285 - 299.
8. Coffman, W. and Kurfman, D. 1968. A comparison of two methods of reading essay examinations. American Educational Research Journal, 5: 11 - 120.
9. Crisp, V. and Johnson, M. 2006. Examiner's annotations: Practice and purpose. Research Matters, 2: 11 - 14.
10. Duguid, P. 2005. 'The art of knowing': Social and tacit dimensions of knowledge and the limits of the community of practice. The Information Society, 21 (2): 109 - 118.
11. Ecclestone, K. 2001. 'I know a 2:1 when I see it': Understanding degree standards in programmes franchised to colleges. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 25: 301 - 313.
12. Gourlay, S. 2006a. Towards conceptual clarity for 'tacit knowledge': A review of empirical studies. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 4: 60 - 69.
13. Gourlay, S. 2006b. Conceptualizing knowledge creation: A critique of Nonaka's theory. Journal of Management Studies, 43 (7): 1415 - 1436.
14. Harlim, J., de Silva, A. and Belski, I. 2009. " Improving feedback in large classes: Application of task evaluation and reflection instrument for student self-assessment (TERISSA) in a unit on business statistics ". In Proceedings of the ATN Assessment Conference, November 19-20, in Melbourne, Australia, Edited by: Milton, J., Hall, C., Lang, J., Allan, G. and Nomikoudis, M. 179 - 193. Melbourne: Learning and Teaching Unit, RMIT University.
15. Harris, K. and James, R. 2006. Facilitating reflection on assessment policies and practices: A planning framework for educative review of assessment. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 3 (2): 23 - 36.
16. Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77: 81 - 112.
17. Kift, S. and Moody, K. 2009. " Harnessing assessment and feedback in the first year to support learning success, engagement and retention ". In Proceedings of the ATN Assessment Conference, November 19-20, in Melbourne, Australia, Edited by: Milton, J., Hall, C., Lang, J., Allan, G. and Nomikoudis, M. 204 - 215. Melbourne: Learning and Teaching Unit, RMIT University.
18. Klein, J.H. 2008. Some directions for research in knowledge sharing. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 6: 41 - 46.
19. Nicol, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. 2006. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31: 199 - 218.
20. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21. O'Donovan, B., Price, M. and Rust, C. 2004. Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teaching in Higher Education, 9: 325 - 335.
22. Pinot de Moira, A., Massey, C., Baird, J. and Morrissy, M. 2002. Marking consistency over time. Research in Education, 67: 79 - 87.
23. Polanyi, M. 1958. Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
24. Polanyi, M. 1962. Tacit knowing: Its bearing on some problems in philosophy. Reviews of Modern Physics, 34 (4): 601 - 616.
25. Price, M. 2005. Assessment standards: The role of communities of practice and the scholarship of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30: 215 - 230.
26. Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O'Donovan, B. 2010. Feedback: All that effort, but what is the effect?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35: 277 - 289.
27. Price, M. and Rust, C. 1999. The experience of introducing a common criteria assessment grid across an academic department. Quality in Higher Education, 5: 133 - 144.
28. Rust, C., O'Donovan, B. and Price, M. 2005. A social constructivist assessment process model: How the research literature shows us this could be best practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30: 231 - 240.
29. Rust, C., Price, M. and O'Donovan, B. 2003. Improving students' learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28: 147 - 164.
30. Sadler, R.D. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18: 119 - 144.
31. Saunders, M. and Davis, S. 1998. The use of assessment criteria to ensure consistency of marking: Some implications for good practice. Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 6: 162 - 171.
32. Smith, E. and Coombe, K. 2006. Quality and qualms in the marking of university assignments by sessional staff: An exploratory study. Higher Education, 51: 45 - 69.
33. Spear, M. 1997. The influence of contrast effects upon teachers' marks. Educational Research, 39: 229 - 233.
34. Tan, K.H.K. and Prosser, M. 2004. Qualitatively different ways of differentiating student achievement: a phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of grade descriptors. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29: 267 - 282.
35. Weigle, S. 1999. Investigating rater/prompt interactions in writing assessment: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Assessing Writing, 6: 145 - 178.
36. Wilson, T.D. 2002. The nonsense of 'knowledge management'. Information Research 8: 1. http://informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html (accessed December 13, 2011).
37. Wolf, A. 1995. Competence-based assessment, Buckingham: Open University Press.
38. Yucel, R., Bird, F.L., Blanksby, T.M., Valenta, K., Gendall, A.R., Plummer, K.M., Malone, B.S. and Harvey, A.S. 2009. A broad based, grass-roots, community of practice achieving curriculum reform in first year biology. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 3: A1 - A10.