Mark my words: the role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices

Abstract

(2011) Mark my words: the role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (6). pp. 655-670.Downloaded from: http://insight.cumbria.ac.uk/1179/ Usage of any items from the University of Cumbria's institutional repository 'Insight' must conform to the following fair usage guidelines.Any item and its associated metadata held in the University of Cumbria's institutional repository Insight (unless stated otherwise on the metadata record) may be copied, displayed or performed, and stored in line with the JISC fair dealing guidelines (available here) for educational and not-for-profit activities provided that• the authors, title and full bibliographic details of the item are cited clearly when any part of the work is referred to verbally or in the written form• a hyperlink/URL to the original Insight record of that item is included in any citations of the work • the content is not changed in any way• all files required for usage of the item are kept together with the main item file. You may not• sell any part of an item• refer to any part of an item without citation • amend any item or contextualise it in a way that will impugn the creator's reputation• remove or alter the copyright statement on an item.The full policy can be found here. Alternatively contact the University of Cumbria Repository Editor by emailing insight@cumbria.ac.uk. This article seeks to illuminate the gap between UK policy and practice in relation to the use of criteria for allocating grades. It critiques criterion-referenced grading from three perspectives. T el e le tu e s f o t o u i e sities e e asked to thi k aloud as the g aded t o itte assignments. The study found that assessors made holistic rather than analytical judgements. A high proportion of the tutors did not make use of written criteria in their marking and, where they were used, it was largely a post hoc process in refining, checking or justifying a holistic decision. Norm referencing was also found to be an important part of the grading process despite published criteria. The autho s de elop the otio of tuto s sta da ds f a e o ks, i flue ed stude ts o k, a d providing the interpretive lens used to decide grades. The implications for standards, and for students, of presenting the grading process as analytical and objective are discussed.

Making judgements about students making work: Lecturers’ assessment practices in art and design

“…An earlier study carried out by the authors explored the judgement making associated with the assessment of essays in the context of the humanities and education (Bloxham, Boyd and Orr 2011). In this study all marking was a solitary activity where lecturers sat alone marking their essays.…”

“…In this study the task was the assessment of students' work. As alluded to above this methodology can be used in an experimental situation (Suto and Greatorex 2008) or in a live assessment context (Bloxham, Boyd and Orr 2011). This approach to data collection limits the participants' reliance on memory (Suto and Greatorex 2008) and the findings are less likely to be manipulated reports of marking practice.…”

“…This approach to data collection limits the participants' reliance on memory (Suto and Greatorex 2008) and the findings are less likely to be manipulated reports of marking practice. For a fuller exploration of the merits of using 'think aloud' protocols see Bloxham, Boyd and Orr (2011). Think aloud methodology commonly situates within a cognitivist paradigm but it is being reframed for use within this social practices and interpretive study.…”

“…It draws on and links to two bodies of research by the authors. Firstly it is part of a wider study that is exploring assessment practices in a range of disciplines (Bloxham, Boyd and Orr 2011). Secondly it builds on previous work carried out by one of the authors specifically in the area of art and design assessment (Orr 2010a, Orr 2011a, Orr 2011b).…”

External peer review of assessment: an effective approach to verifying standards?

“…External reviewers may act to give the impression of some form of external checking but that checking is likely to be against an individual's own 'standards framework' (Bloxham et al 2011) and that is only where they are provided with student work uncontaminated by markers' grades, comments or knowledge of the sampling criteria for the work they review. Examiners' responses to the KRG exercise and their reluctance to give grades because they did not have sufficient knowledge of the context reinforces the view that marking is a situated activity and that judgements cannot easily be made in the absence of other 'referencing' information (e.g.…”