Cited by 51

Three in-course assessment reforms to improve higher education learning outcomes

Sadler, D. Royce·2016·Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

Abstract

A current international concern is that, for too large a proportion of graduates, their higher order cognitive and practical capabilities are below acceptable levels. The constituent courses of academic programmes are the most logical sites for developing these capabilities. Contributing to patchy attainment are deficiencies in three particular aspects of assessment practice: the design and specifications of many assessment tasks; the minimum requirements for awarding a passing grade in a course and granting credit towards the degree; and the accumulation of points derived from quizzes, assessments or activities completed during the teaching period. Rethinking and reforming these would lead to improvements for significant sub-populations of students. Pursuing such a goal would also have significant positive implications for academic teachers, but be contingent on favourable contextual settings including departmental and institutional priorities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02602938.2015.1064858

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sadler, D. R.
Venue
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Published
2015-07-17
Volume
41
Issue
7
Pages
1081-1099
ISSN
  • 0260-2938
  • 1469-297X
Cited by
51
References
6
Language
en

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