Assessment for social justice: the role of assessment in achieving social justice
Abstract
This article provides a rationale for assessment for social justice, through which a greater focus is given to the role of assessment in achieving the social justice aspirations of higher education. It takes inspiration from work on assessment for learning to propose that as assessment is a powerful driver of how and what students learn, we should also consider its potential to drive a commitment for greater social justice within and through higher education. The article provides a critique of procedural notions of social justice, which I argue have implicitly influenced current notions of fairness in assessment. Greater reflection on the possible flaws in such procedural notions is a starting point for rethinking assessment in social justice terms. I then draw on two alternative conceptualisations of social justice – the capabilities approach and critical theory – to consider the ways in which key assessment issues would look differently through these alternative lenses. The article does not aim to establish a prescriptive list of practices around the notion of assessment for social justice, but rather upon debate and a greater appreciation of the implications of how we conceptualise justice and the attendant influence on what may be considered appropriate assessment policies and practices.
Integrity 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?
McArthur suggests an approach that combines the capability theory of Sen and Nussbaum with the critical theory of Fraser to develop assessment praxis incorporating both the justice of assessment within higher education and the role of assessment in nurturing learning that will promote greater social justice within society as a whole.
“McArthur then suggests an approach that combines the capability theory of Sen and Nussbaum with the critical theory of Fraser to develop assessment praxis that incorporates both 'the justice of assessment within higher education, and […] the role of assessment in nurturing the forms of learning that will promote greater social justice within society as a whole' (McArthur 2016, 967).”
From A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy (2019) · cites this paper as McArthur 2016
A social justice approach to assessment is becoming increasingly recognised as a potential way forward for the sector.
“A social justice approach - in its broadest sense - to assessment is becoming increasingly recognised as a potential way forward for the sector (McArthur 2016; Nguyen and Walker 2015; Cazden 2012; Hockings 2010; Stowell 2004).”
From A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy (2019) · cites this paper as McArthur 2016
Assessment in UK higher education is a social construct, neither value-neutral nor culture-free, arising from specific historical, social and cultural loci through which specific values are reflected and enshrined.
“Assessment in UK higher education is neither value-neutral nor culture-free. It is a social construct: a practice and process arising from specific historical, social and cultural loci through and in which specific values are reflected and enshrined (McArthur 2016; Leathwood 2005; Stowell 2004; Filer 2000).”
From A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy (2019) · cites this paper as McArthur 2016
McArthur does not articulate how her approach might be achieved, and it remains to be clarified what might best facilitate the realisation of socially just assessment.
“However, at this point in time, McArthur does not articulate how her approach might be achieved, and it remains to be clarified precisely what might best facilitate the realisation of socially just assessment.”
From A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy (2019) · cites this paper as McArthur 2016
Unconscious biases may be partially contained by assessment procedures that inhibit their full realisation during marking, but without being addressed directly the prejudices, and hence injustices, still remain.
“The latter may include, for example, unconscious biases which, although 'partially contained by assessment procedures that inhibit their full realisation during marking', without being addressed directly 'the prejudices, and hence injustices, still remain' (McArthur 2016, 973-974).”
From A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy (2019) · cites this paper as McArthur 2016
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 33 · Cited by 137
- Authors
- McArthur, J.
- Affiliations
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- McArthur, Jan
- ORCID
- McArthur, Jan
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-06-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 967-981
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W1556247972
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 23.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/M010082/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Educational Theory and Curriculum Studies
- Keywords
- social justice, higher education, assessment for learning, procedural justice, assessment fairness, capability approach, critical theory, assessment policy, student learning
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
