The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A social constructivist assessment process model: how the research literature shows us this could be best practice
Open accessAbstract
Although assessment is acknowledged as vitally important in its effect on students’ approaches to learning, there is much criticism of assessment practice. This paper argues that if a social constructivist approach is applied to the assessment process many of the problems could be overcome. It describes what a social constructivist approach to assessment would look like and gives practical examples, from the research literature, of ways it could be implemented.
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
(1978) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 53,488
Vygotsky, L. S. (1964) · Bulletin of the Orton Society · doi:10.1007/bf02928399 · Cited by 20,704
Bruner, J. (1986) · doi:10.4159/9780674029019 · Cited by 8,657
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · cited 1×
“Of the whole assessment process, the research literature is clear that feedback is arguably the most important part in its potential to affect future learning and student achievement (Hattie, 1987; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Gibbs & Simpson, 2002).”
Background(1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-6498 · Cited by 8,149
Teaching For Quality Learning At University
BIGGS, J. B., & Tang, C. S. (1999) · Cited by 7,559
Actual Minds, Possible Worlds.
Mergler, N., Schleifer, R., & Bruner, J. (1986) · MLN · doi:10.2307/2905728 · Cited by 6,609
Learning to Teach in Higher Education
Ramsden, P., & Ramsden, P. (2003) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203507711 · Cited by 5,106
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285
Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079812331380364 · Cited by 2,604
Cited by
The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354 · Cited by 2,428
“Social constructivist feedback research takes the perspective that shared and individual interpretations are developed through dialogue, sense-making and through co-construction between participants (Price, Handley, and Millar 2011; Rust, O’Donovan, and Price 2005).”
Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.691462 · Cited by 1,636
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143
Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.084 · Cited by 649
Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement
Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.483513 · Cited by 442
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rust, C., O’Donovan, B., & Price, M.
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 231-240
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W2166134704
- Cited by
- 382
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 71.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A social constructivist assessment process model: how the research literature shows us this could be best practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02602930500063819
- The paper
- Rust, C., O’Donovan, B., & Price, M. (2005). A social constructivist assessment process model: how the research literature shows us this could be best practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500063819
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.
