Fairness in classroom assessment

SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 125-144

  Tierney, Robin D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919841678     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781452218649.n8     Document Type: Chapter

References (149)

1. Allen, J. D., & Lambating, J. (2001, April). Validity and reliability in assessment and grading: Perspectives of preservice and inservice teachers and teacher education professors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
4. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education. (1966). Standards for educational and psychological tests. (1966). Washington, DC: Authors.
5. American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education. (1974). Standards for educational and psychological tests. (1966). Washington, DC: Authors.
6. Andrade, H. G. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27-30.
7. Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(3), 3-13.
8. Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Retrieved from http://www.assessment-reform-group.org/publications.html
9. Badger, E. (1999). Finding one's voice: A model for more equitable assessment. In A. L.Nettles & M. T.Nettles (eds.), Measuring up: Challenges minorities face in educational assessment (pp. 53-69). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
10. Birenbaum, M., Kimron, H., & Shilton, H. (2011). Nested contexts that shape assessment for learning: School-based professional learning community and classroom culture. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 35-48.
11. Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., Marshall, B., & Serret, N. (2010). Validity in teachers' summative assessments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2), 2215-2232.
12. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
13. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2006). The reliability of assessments. In J.Gardner (ed.), Assessment and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Bredo, E. (2006). Philosophies of educational research. In J. L.Green, G.Camilli, & P. B.Elmore (eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 3-31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Brighton, C. M. (2003). The effects of middle school teachers' beliefs on classroom practices. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27 (2/3), 177-206.
16. Brookfield, S. (2001). Unmasking power: Foucault and adult learning. Canadian Journal for Studies in Adult Education, 15(1), 1-23.
17. Brookhart, S. M. (1993). Teachers' grading practices: Meaning and values. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(2), 123-142.
18. Brookhart, S. M. (1994). Teachers' grading: Practice and theory. Applied Measurement in Education, 7(4), 279-301.
19. Brookhart, S. M. (2003). Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 5-12.
20. Brookhart, S. M. (2004a). Classroom assessment: Tensions and intersections in theory and practice. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 429-458.
21. Brookhart, S. M. (2004b). Grading. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
22. Bulterman-Bos, J., Terwel, J., Verloop, N., & Wardekker, W. (2002). Observation in teaching: Toward a practice of objectivity. Teachers College Record, 104(6), 1069-1100.
23. Bursuck, W. D., Munk, D. D., & Olson, M. (1999). The fairness of report card grading adaptations: What do students with and without learning disabilities think? Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 84-92.
24. Buzzelli, C. A., & Johnston, B. (2002). The moral dimensions of teaching: Language, power, and culture in classroom interaction. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
25. Camilli, G. (2006). Test fairness. In R. L.Brennan (ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 221-256). Westport, CT: Praeger.
26. Campbell, E. (2003). The ethical teacher. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
27. Childs, R. A. (1990). Gender bias and fairness. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests Measurement and Evaluation, American Institutes for Research. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED328610)
28. Chory-Assad, R. M. (2002). Classroom justice: Perceptions of fairness as a predictor of student motivation, learning, and aggression. Communication Quarterly, 50(1), 58-77.
29. Clarke, M. M., Madaus, G. F., Horn, C. L., & Ramos, M. A. (2000). Retrospective on educational testing and assessment in the 20th century. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 159-181.
30. Cole, N. S., & Zieky, M. J. (2001). The new faces of fairness. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38(4), 369-382.
31. Cowie, B. (2005). Student commentary on classroom assessment in science: A sociocultural interpretation. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 199-214.
32. Cowie, B. (in press). Equity, ethics and engagement: Principles for quality formative assessment in primary science classrooms. In C.Milne, K. G.Tobin, & D.Degenero (eds.), Sociocultural studies and implications for science education: The experiential and the virtual. Dortrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
33. Crisp, V. (2010). Towards a model of the judgement processes involved in examination marking. Oxford Review of Education, 36(1), 1-21.
34. Crossouard, B. (2011). Using formative assessment to support complex learning in conditions of social adversity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 59-72.
35. Dalbert, C., Schneidewind, U., & Saalbach, A. (2007). Justice judgments concerning grading in school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 420-433.
36. Dann, R. (2002). Promoting assessment as learning: Improving the learning process. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
37. Davies, A. (2010). Test fairness: A response. Language Testing, 27(2), 171-176.
38. DeLain, M. T. (2005). Equity and performance-based assessment: An insider's view. In S. J.Barrentine & S. M.Stokes (ed.), Reading assessment: Principles and practices for elementary teachers (2nd ed., pp. 52-55). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
39. Delandshere, G. (2001). Implicit theories, unexamined assumptions and the status quo of educational assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 8(2), 113-133.
40. Dixon, H., & Williams, R. (2003). Teachers' understanding and use of formative assessment in literacy learning. New Zealand Annual Review of Education. Retrieved from http://assessment.tki.org.nz/Research/Research
41. Dorman, J. P., Fisher, D. L., & Waldrip, B. G. (2006). Classroom environment, students' perceptions of assessment, academic efficacy and attitude to science: A LISREL analysis. In D. L.Fisher & M. S.Khine (eds.), Contemporary approaches to research on learning environments: Worldviews. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific.
42. Drummond, M. J. (2003). Assessing children's learning (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton Publishers, Ltd.
43. Duffield, K. E., & Spencer, J. A. (2002). A survey of medical students' views about the purposes and fairness of assessment. Medical Education, 36(9), 879-886.
44. Earl, L. M. & Katz, S. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessments with purpose in mind. Governments of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Saskatchewan, and Yukon Territory: Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Education.
45. Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
46. Eggen, A. B. (2004). Alfa and omega in student assessment: Exploring identities of secondary school science teachers. Universitetet i Oslo, Norway. Retrieved from http://www.ils.uio.no/forskning/pdh-drgrad/…/AstridEggenAvhandling1.pdf
47. Elhoweris, H., Mutua, K., Alsheikh, N., & Holloway, P. (2005). Effect of children's ethnicity on teachers' referral and recommendation decisions in gifted and talented programs. Remedial and Special Education, 26(1), 25-31.
48. Elwood, J. (2006). Formative assessment: Possibilities, boundaries and limitations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 13(2), 215-232.
49. Ernest, J. M., Heckaman, K. A., Thompson, S. E., Hull, K. M., & Carter, S. W. (2011). Increasing the teaching efficacy of a beginning special education teacher using differentiated instruction: A case study. International Journal of Special Education, 26(1).
50. Finklestein, I. E. (1913). The marking system in theory and practice. Baltimore: Warwick & York, Inc.
51. Frederiksen, J. R., & Collins, A. (1989). A system approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 18(9), 27-32.
52. Gee, J. P. (2003). Opportunity to learn: A language-based perspective on assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(1), 27-46.
53. Giordano, G. (2005). How testing came to dominate American schools: The history of educational assessment. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
54. Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
55. Gipps, C. (1999). Socio-cultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24, 355-392.
56. Gipps, C. (2005). Commentary on "the idea of testing: Psychometric and sociocultural perspectives." Measurement, 3(2), 98-102.
57. Gordon, M. E., & Fay, C. H. (2010). The effects of grading and teaching practices on students' perceptions of grading fairness. College Teaching, 58(3), 93-98.
58. Graham, P. (2005). Classroom-based assessment: Changing knowledge and practice through pre-service teacher education. Teacher and Teacher Education, 21, 607-621.
59. Green, S., Johnson, R. L., Kim, D. H., & Pope, N. S. (2007). Ethics in classroom assessment practices: Issues and attitudes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 999-1011.
60. Gummer, E. S. (2000). Rhetoric and reality: Congruence between the knowledge and practice of assessment of the classroom science teacher and the reform initiative of the national science education standards. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette. (UMI No. AAT 3018203)
61. Guskey, T. R. (2006, April). "It wasn't fair!" Educators' recollections of their experiences as students with grading. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
62. Guskey, T. R., & Jung, L. A. (2009). Grading and reporting in a standards-based environment: Implications for students with special needs. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 53-62.
63. Gynnild, V. (2011). Student appeals of grades: A comparative study of university policies and practices. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 41-57.
64. Horn, R. A. (2002). Reform in curriculum, instruction, and assessment, Understanding educational reform: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc.
65. Jackson, P. W., Boostrom, R. E., & Hansen, D. T. (1993). The moral life of schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
66. Jiménez, R. T., (2005). More equitable literacy assessments for Latino students. In S. J.Barrentine & S. M.Stokes (eds.), Reading assessment: Principles and practices for elementary teachers (2nd ed., pp. 49-51). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
67. Joint Advisory Committee. (1993). Principles for fair student assessment practices for education in Canada. Retrieved from http://www2.education.ualberta.ca/educ/psych/crame/files/eng_prin.pdf
68. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (2003). The student evaluation standards: How to improve evaluations of students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
69. Kane, M. (2010). Validity and fairness. Language Testing, 27(2), 177-182.
70. Knoch, U., & Elder, C. (2010). Validity and fairness implications of varying time conditions on a diagnostic test of academic English writing proficiency. System, 38(1), 63-74.
71. Koch, P. R., Steelman, L. C., Mulkey, L., & Catsambis, S. (2008). Naughty or nice?: Equity, gender and behavior. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 11(4), 409-430.
72. Kornhaber, M. L. (2004). Assessment, standards, and equity. In J. A.Banks (ed.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 91-109). New York: John Wiley.
73. Kunnan, A. J. (2010). Test fairness and Toulmin's argument structure. Language Testing, 27(2), 183-189.
74. Lam, T. C. (1995). Fairness in performance assessment. Greensboro, NC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Student Services. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED391982)
75. Lane, S., & Silver, E. A. (1999). Fairness and equity in measuring student learning using a mathematics performance assessment: Results from the quasar project. In A. L.Nettles & M. T.Nettles (eds.), Measuring up: Challenges minorities face in educational assessment (pp. 97-120). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
76. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria (CSE Technical Report 331). Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation.
77. Markus, J. (2002). Student assessment and evaluation in studio art. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada. (UMI No. AAT NQ69131)
78. Mauldin, R. K. (2009). Gendered perceptions of learning and fairness when choice between exam types is offered. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10(3), 253-264.
79. McDonald, B., & Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: The effects of self-assessment training on performance in external examinations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(2), 209-220.
80. McMillan, J. H. (2001). Secondary teachers' classroom assessment and grading practices. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(1), 20-32.
81. McMillan, J. H. (2003). Understanding and improving teachers' classroom assessment decision making: Implications for theory and practice. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 34-43.
82. McMillan, J. H. (2011). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
83. Messick, S. (1965). Personality measurement and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 20(2), 136-142.
84. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11.
85. Messick, S. (2000). Consequences of test interpretation and use: The fusion of validity and values in psychological assessment. In R. D.Goffin & E.Helmes (eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment (pp. 3-20). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
86. Messick, S., & Anderson, S. (1970). Educational testing, individual development, and social responsibility. The Counseling Psychologist, 2(2), 80-88.
87. Miner. (1990). Teacher evaluations of case descriptions of LD gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34(1), 37-39.
88. Moon, T. (2005). The role of assessment in differentiation. Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 226-233.
89. Morgan, C., & Watson, A. (2002). The interpretive nature of teachers' assessment of students' mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2), 78-110.
90. Moss, P. (1994). Can there be validity without reliability. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 5-12.
91. Moss, P. (1998). The role of consequences in validity theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17(2), 6-12.
92. Moss, P. (2003). Reconceptualizing validity for classroom assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 13-25.
93. Moss, P., Pullin, D., Gee, J. P., & Haertel, E. H. (2005). The idea of testing: Psychometric and sociocultural perspectives. Measurement, 3(2), 63-83.
94. Nagy, P. (2000). Three roles of assessment: Gatekeeping, accountability, and instructional diagnosis. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(4), 262-279.
95. National Research Council. (2010). State assessment systems: Exploring best practices and innovations: Summary of two workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
96. Nettles, A. L., & Nettles, M. T. (1999). Measuring up: Challenges minorities face in educational assessment. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
97. Newkirk, T. (2004). A mania for rubrics. In A. S.Canestrari & B. A.Marlowe (eds.), Educational foundations: An anthology of critical readings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
98. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2010). Growing success: Assessment, evaluation and reporting in Ontario schools (1st ed.). Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer for Ontario.
99. Parkes, J. (2007). Reliability as argument. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(4), 2-10.
100. Peterson, S., & Kennedy, K. (2006). Sixth-grade teachers' written comments on student writing. Written Communication, 23(1), 36-62.
101. Phillips, M. (2002). Is "same" treatment "fair" treatment? In J.Shulman, A. K.Whittaker, & M.Lew (eds.), Using assessments to teach for understanding. New York: Teachers College Press.
102. Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment: Fairness through the prism of mediation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(2), 99-112.
103. Popham, W. J. (1981). Modern educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
104. Popham, W. J. (2008). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
105. Pryor, J., & Crossouard, B. (2008). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 1-20.
106. Pryor, J., & Lubisi, C. (2002). Reconceptualising educational assessment in South Africa-testing times for teachers. International Journal of Educational Development, 22(6), 673-686.
107. Resh, N. (2009). Justice in grades allocation: Teachers' perspective. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 12(3), 315-325.
108. Resh, N., & Dalbert, C. (2007). Gender differences in sense of justice about grades: A comparative study of high school students in Israel and Germany. Teachers College Record, 109(2), 322-342.
109. Robinson, J. M. (2002). In search of fairness: An application of multi-reviewer anonymous peer review in a large class. Journal of Further & Higher Education, 26(2), 183-192.
110. Russell, M. K., & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
111. Ryan, T. G. (2000). An action research study of secondary science praxis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada. (UMI No. AAT NQ58601)
112. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems, Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
113. Sadler, D. R. (2005). Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175-194.
114. Schendel, E., & O'Neill, P. (1999). Exploring the theories and consequences of self-assessment through ethical inquiry. Assessing Writing, 6(2), 199-227.
115. Shepard, L. (1997). The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(2), 5-8, 13, 24.
116. Shepard, L. (2000). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. CSE Technical Report 517. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
117. Shepard, L. (2006). Classroom assessment. In R. L.Brennan (ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 623-646). Westport, CT: American Council on Education/Praeger.
118. Shulman, L. S. (2004). The wisdom of practice: Managing complexity in medicine and teaching. In S. M.Wilson (ed.), The wisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning, and learning to teach (pp. 249-271). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
119. Smith, E., & Gorard, S. (2006). Pupils' views on equity in schools. Compare, 36(1), 41-56.
120. Smith, J. K. (2003). Reconsidering reliability in classroom assessment and grading. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 26-33.
121. Speck, B. W. (1998). Unveiling some of the mystery of professional judgment in classroom assessment. In R. S.Anderson & B. W.Speck (eds.), Classroom assessment and the new learning paradigm (pp. 89-96). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
122. Stiggins, R. J., & Bridgeford, N. J. (1985). The ecology of classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22(4), 271-286.
123. Stiggins, R. J., Conklin, N. F., & Bridgeford, N. J. (1986, Summer). Classroom assessment: A key to effective education. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 5-17.
124. Stiggins, R. J., Frisbie, D. A., & Griswold, P. A. (1989). Inside high school grading practices: Building a research agenda. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 8(2), 5-14.
125. Stobart, G. (2005). Fairness in multicultural assessment systems. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12 (3), 275-287.
126. Stobart, G. (2006). The validity of formative assessment. In J.Gardner (ed.), Assessment and learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
127. Suskie, L. (2002). Fair assessment practices: Giving students equitable opportunities to demonstrate learning. Adventures in Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.sabes.org/resources/publications/adventures/vol14/14suskie.htm
128. Szpyrka, D. A. (2001). Exploration of instruction, assessment, and equity in the middle school science classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida, Orlando. (UMI No. AAT 3029061)
129. Tata, J. (2005). The influence of national culture on the perceived fairness of grading procedures: A comparison of the United States and China. Journal of Psychology, 139(5), 401-412.
130. Tierney, R. D. (2010). Insights into fairness in classroom assessment: Experienced English teachers share their practical wisdom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa, Canada. (UMI No. AAT NR69109)
131. Tierney, R. D., Simon, M., & Charland, J. (2011). Being fair: Teachers' interpretations of principles for standards-based grading. The Educational Forum, 75(3), 210-227.
132. Tierney, R. J. (2005). Literacy assessment reform: Shifting beliefs, principled possibilities, and emerging practices. In S. J.Barrentine & S. M.Stokes (ed.), Reading assessment: Principles and practices for elementary teachers (2nd ed., pp. 29-40). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
133. Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Grading and differentiation: Paradox or good practice? Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 262-269.
134. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating formative assessment: Teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom. New York: Open University Press.
135. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: Using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 615-631.
136. Volante, L. (2006). Reducing bias in classroom assessment and evaluation. Orbit, 36, 34-36.
137. Watson, A. (1999). Paradigmatic conflicts in informal mathematics assessment as sources of social inequity. Educational Review, 51(2), 105-115.
138. Weeden, P., Winter, J., & Broadfoot, P. (2002). Assessment: What's in it for schools?New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
139. Wendorf, C. A., & Alexander, S. (2005). The influence of individual- and class-level fairness-related perceptions on student satisfaction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(2), 190-206.
140. Whittington, D. (1999). Making room for values and fairness: Teaching reliability and validity in the classroom context. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(1), 14-22.
141. Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
142. Wiliam, D. (1994). Toward a philosophy for educational assessment. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association, Oxford, UK.
143. Wilson, M. (2006). Rethinking rubrics in writing assessment. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, Reed Elsevier, Inc.
144. Wormeli, R. (2006). Fair isn't always equal: Assessing and grading in the differentiated classroom. Portland, ME: National Middle School Association.
145. Wyatt-Smith, C., Klenowski, V., & Gunn, S. (2010). The centrality of teachers' judgement practice in assessment: A study of standards in moderation. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(1), 59-75.
146. Xi, X. (2010). How do we go about investigating test fairness? Language Testing, 27(2), 147-170.
147. Yip, D. Y., & Cheung, D. (2005). Teachers' concerns on school-based assessment of practical work. Journal of Biological Education, 39 (4), 156-162.
148. Yung, B. H. W. (2001). Three views of fairness in a school-based assessment scheme of practical work in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 23(10), 985-1005.
149. Zoeckler, L. G. (2005). Moral dimensions of grading in high school English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington. (UMI No. AAT3183500)