The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples
Torraco, R. J. (2005) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484305278283 · Cited by 3,534
Developing the theory of formative assessment
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5 · Cited by 3,301 · cited 3×
“As noted earlier, Black and Wiliam (2009, pp. 9–10) reinforced this by articulating the difference between intended use and results in relation to realizing the purpose of assessment (formative or summative). As such, it is necessary to ensure that the evidence obtained is used in a way that fits the intended purpose…”
BackgroundInfluentialWriting narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006) · Journal of Chiropractic Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0899-3467(07)60142-6 · Cited by 2,224
The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture
Shepard, L. A. (2000) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x029007004 · Cited by 2,161 · cited 2×
“Leading scholars (Shepard, 2000; Gipps, 1999) in assessment of formal learning have long argued that teacher beliefs greatly influence their conceptions about what is valued as learning, and by implication, how learning is assessed.”
BackgroundTamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654310393361 · Cited by 1,029
Effects of Problem-Based Learning: A Meta-Analysis From the Angle of Assessment
Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543075001027 · Cited by 917
The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education
van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.001 · Cited by 230
Teacher Learning of Technology Enhanced Formative Assessment
Feldman, A., & Capobianco, B. M. (2008) · Journal of Science Education and Technology · doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9084-0 · Cited by 65
Cited by
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143
Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017) · Journal of Educational Technology Systems · doi:10.1177/0047239516661713 · Cited by 967
Yorke, M. (2003) · Higher Education · doi:10.1023/a:1023967026413 · Cited by 973
Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001 · Cited by 698
Using learning analytics to scale the provision of personalised feedback
Pardo, A., Jovanovic, J., Dawson, S., Gašević, D., & Mirriahi, N. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12592 · Cited by 425
Metadata
- Authors
- Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 2333-2351
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2062265524
- Cited by
- 1,260
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 155.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
