Analytical rubrics in higher education: A repository of empirical data

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 46, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 924-927

  Hack, Catherine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GRADING;

ASSESSMENT TASKS; CREATIVE COMMONS; EFFECTIVE LEARNING; HIGHER EDUCATION; LEARNING PREFERENCES; POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS; QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS; STUDENT LEARNING;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84939572326     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12304     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Brookhart, S. M. & Chen, F. (2014). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review. DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2014.929565 (ahead of print).
2. Data Protection Act. (1998). (c29). London: HMSO.
3. Human Rights Act (1998). (c42). London: HMSO.
4. Jonsson, A. & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2, 2, 130-144.
5. Messick, S. (1996). Validity of performance assessments. Technical Issues in Large-scale Performance Assessment, 1-18.
6. Panadero, E. & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: a review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129-144.
7. Reddy, Y. M. & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation In Higher Education, 35, 435-448.
8. Ulster University (n.d.) Data protection. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://www.ulster.ac.uk/guide/ useful-info/policies/data-protection/
9. University of Ulster (2012) Assessment handbook, 136-146. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://www.ulster.ac.uk/academicoffice/download/Assessment%20Criteria.pdf