2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100997
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of rubric quality on marker variation in higher education

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The criteria for the categorization of quality SAS models were taken from Bloom, (Fauzan, Plomp, & Gravemeijer, 2013) with the following steps. 3 presents the Validity of the SAS model (Chakraborty, Dann, Mandal, Dann, & Paul, 2021). (Chakraborty et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The criteria for the categorization of quality SAS models were taken from Bloom, (Fauzan, Plomp, & Gravemeijer, 2013) with the following steps. 3 presents the Validity of the SAS model (Chakraborty, Dann, Mandal, Dann, & Paul, 2021). (Chakraborty et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 presents the Validity of the SAS model (Chakraborty, Dann, Mandal, Dann, & Paul, 2021). (Chakraborty et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Having said that, it would be required to train the staff involved and complete a moderation process to address issues such as bias and ensuring equity and consistency across multiple evaluators (Chakraborty et al, 2021) a matter which is already practised in different contexts.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%