Research project assessments and supervisor marking: maintaining academic rigour through robust reconciliation processes

Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

Volumn 45, Issue 8, 2020, Pages 1181-1191

  McQuade, Richard ^a   Kometa, Simon ^a   Brown, Jeremy ^a   Bevitt, Debra ^a   Hall, Judith ^b  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

bias; moderation; reconciliation process; second marking; supervisor marking; Undergraduate project reports

Indexed keywords

EID: 85079777918     PISSN: 02602938     EISSN: 1469297X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2020.1726284     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Annetts, S., U., Jones, and R., Deursen. 2013. “An Innovative Review of an Undergraduate Dissertation Double Marking Policy.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 50 (3): 308–317. doi:10.1080/14703297.2012.760771.
2. Balla, J., and P., Boyle. 1994. “Assessment of Student Performance: A Framework for Improving Practice.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 19 (1): 17–28. doi:10.1080/0260293940190102.
3. BERA (British Educational Research Association). 2018. Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. 4th ed. London.
4. Bettany-Saltikov, J., S., Kilinc, and K., Stow. 2009. “Bones, Boys, Bombs and Booze: An Exploratory Study of the Reliability of Marking Dissertations across Disciplines.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34 (6): 621–639. doi:10.1080/02602930802302196.
5. Hand, L., and D., Clewes. 2000. “Marking the Difference: An Investigation of the Criteria used for Assessing Undergraduate Dissertations in a Business School.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 25 (1): 5–21. doi:10.1080/713611416.
6. Hawe, E., 2003. “‘It’s Pretty Difficult to Fail’: The Reluctance of Lecturers to Award a Failing Grade.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 28 (4): 371–382. doi:10.1080/0260293032000066209.
7. Hawthorne, K., F., Wood, K., Hood, R., Cannings-John, and H., Houston. 2006. “Learning to Mark: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences and Concerns of Medical Markers.” BMC Medical Education 6 (1): 25. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-6-25.
8. Jawitz, J., 2007. “New Academics Negotiating Communities of Practice: Learning to Swim with the Big Fish.” Teaching in Higher Education 12 (2): 185–197. doi:10.1080/13562510701191943.
9. Matthews, K. E., L., Mercer-Mapstone, S. L., Dvorakova, A., Acai, A., Cook-Sather, P., Felten, M., Healey, R. L., Healey, and E., Marquis. 2019. “Enhancing Outcomes and Reducing Inhibitors to the Engagement of Students and Staff in Learning and Teaching Partnerships: Implications for Academic Development.” International Journal for Academic Development 24 (3): 246–259. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2018.1545233.
10. McKinstry, B. H., H. S., Cameron, R. A., Elton, and S. C., Riley. 2004. “Leniency and Halo Effects in Marking Undergraduate Short Research Projects.” BMC Medical Education 4 (1): 28. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-4-28.
11. Murphy, M. J., R. D. A., Seneviratne, O. J., Remers, and M. H., Davis. 2009. “Hawks’ and ‘Doves’: Effect of Feedback on Grades Awarded by Supervisors of Student Selected Components.” Medical Teacher 31 (10): e484–e488. doi:10.3109/01421590903258670.
12. Nyamapfene, A., 2012. “Involving Supervisors in Assessing Undergraduate Student Projects: Is double Marking Robust?” Engineering Education 7 (1): 40–47. doi:10.11120/ened.2012.07010040.
13. Pathirage, C., R., Haigh, D., Amaratunga, and D., Baldry. 2007. “Enhancing the Quality and Consistency of Undergraduate Dissertation Assessment: A Case Study.” Quality Assurance in Education 15 (3): 271–286. doi:10.1108/09684880710773165.
14. Saunders, M. N. K., and S. M., Davis. 1998. “The Use of Assessment Criteria to Ensure Consistency of Marking: Some Implications for Good Practice.” Quality Assurance in Education 6 (3): 162–171. doi:10.1108/09684889810220465.
15. Sears, H. J., and E. J., Wood. 2005. “Linking Teaching and Research in the Biosciences.” Bioscience Education 5 (1): 1–20. doi:10.3108/beej.2005.05000005.
16. Senior, R. M., P., Bartholomew, A., Soor, D., Shepperd, N., Bartholomew, and C., Senior. 2018. ““The Rules of Engagement”: Student Engagement and Motivation to Improve the Quality of Undergraduate Learning.” Frontiers in Education 3: 32. doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00032.
17. Seymour, E., A. B., Hunter, S. L., Laursen, and T., Deantoni. 2004. “Establishing the Benefits of Research Experiences for Undergraduates in the Sciences: First Findings from a Three-Year Study.” Science Education 88 (4): 493–534. doi:10.1002/sce.10131.
18. Shay, S., 2005. “The Assessment of Complex Tasks: A Double Reading.” Studies in Higher Education 30 (6): 663–679. doi:10.1080/03075070500339988.
19. Tissington, P., and C., Senior. 2017. “Research Activity and the New Pedagogy: Why Carrying out Research is Essential for Effective Learning.” Frontiers in Psychology 8: 1838. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01838.
20. Webster, F., D., Pepper, and A., Jenkins. 2000. “Assessing the Undergraduate Dissertation.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 25 (1): 71–80. doi:10.1080/02602930050025042.
21. Wilson, A., S., Howitt, and D., Higgins. 2016. “A Fundamental Misalignment: Intended Learning and Assessment Practices in Undergraduate Science Research Projects.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 41 (6): 869–884. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1048505.