Rubrics for Developing Students’ Professional Judgement: A Study of Sustainable Assessment in Arts Education
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Service-learning practitioners highlight major challenges intensified by the shortage of assessment tools that can reliably and systematically assess students' community experiences.
“Indeed, service-learning practitioners highlight major challenges intensified by the shortage of assessment tools that can reliably and systematically assess students' community experiences [16][17][18].”
From Beyond the Classroom: Integrating the ORID Model for In-Depth Reflection and Assessment in Service-Learning (2024) · cites this paper as [17]
Well-developed rubrics can reduce complexity and enhance the objectivity of assessment.
“As well-developed rubrics can reduce complexity and enhance the objectivity of assessment [17,38]”
From Beyond the Classroom: Integrating the ORID Model for In-Depth Reflection and Assessment in Service-Learning (2024) · cites this paper as [17]
Cites
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645 · see citing works
The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences
Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002 · Cited by 1,509 · see citing works
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/bf02212307 · Cited by 1,443 · see citing works
A review of rubric use in higher education
Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930902862859 · Cited by 917 · see citing works
Sustainable assessment revisited
Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133 · Cited by 576 · see citing works
Ecclestone, K. (2001) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03098770126527 · Cited by 106 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In contrast to Schraw and Moshman (1995), the models of Ecclestone (2001) and Suto and Greatorex (2008) regarding raters’ cognitive operations in marking processes coincided in identifying a shift from mental processes characteristic of explicit knowledge to others more representative of tacit…”
Brooks, V. (2012) · Research Papers in Education · doi:10.1080/02671520903331008 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kayan Fadlelmula, F., & Qadhi, S. M. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14090987 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Menéndez-Varela, J.-L., & Gregori-Giralt, E.
- Venue
- Studies in Educational Evaluation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-09
- Volume
- 58
- Pages
- 70-79
- ISSN
- 0191-491X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2807591409
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 7.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Studies In Educational Evaluation (publishedVersion)
- Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
- European Regional Development Fund (HAR2013-46608-R)
- Institute of Education Sciences (REDICE16-1420)
- Vice-rectorate for Teaching Policy and the Programme for Teaching Innovation at the University of Barcelona (GINDOC-UB/103)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art Education and Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- rubrics, professional judgment, sustainable assessment, art education, student participation in assessment, rubric development, inter-rater reliability, assessment training, evaluation culture, undergraduate students
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
