'I know a 2:1 when I see it': Understanding criteria for degree classifications in franchised university programmes
Abstract
Assessment in higher education is criticised for subjective and norm-referenced criteria. It is widely assumed that clear learning outcomes and criteria make assessment more accessible to students and enable teachers to make more reliable grading decisions. Meanwhile, university programmes are increasingly fragmented amongst other departments or franchised to external providers. Universities must therefore communicate expectations of 'standards' to staff who are not part of a day-to-day university culture. The paper argues that, on their own, assessment criteria cannot generate common interpretations of the required level and standard of work. Instead, internalising and using criteria require a more strategic approach to inducting and socialising staff into an academic community. Unless this socialisation takes account of professional, social and affective dimensions, criteria and guidelines will have limited effects on communicating reliable standards and on raising standards of achievement.
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?
Teachers are considered able to make expert and reliable judgements because of their experiences with repeated judgements forming patterns or instantiations, as well as socialisation into the standards of the discipline.
“Teachers are considered able to make expert and reliable judgements because of their experiences with having to make repeated judgements forming patterns or instantiations, as well as socialisation into the standards of the discipline (Ecclestone 2001).”
From Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018) · cites this paper as Ecclestone 2001
Cites
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 33,219 · see citing works
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · see citing works
Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness
Runkel, P. J., Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1976) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.2307/1978718 · Cited by 4,085 · see citing works
Developing Professional Knowledge And Competence
Eraut, M. R. (2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203486016 · Cited by 3,687 · see citing works
Beyond Testing: Towards a Theory of Educational Assessment
Gipps, C. V. (1994) · Cited by 974 · see citing works
Assessing Learners in Higher Education
Perry, P., Brown, S. A., & Knight, P. (1995) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121949 · Cited by 694 · see citing works
Wolf, A. (2001) · Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (Québec government) · Cited by 393 · see citing works
(1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Evaluating authentic assessment : problems and possibilities in new approaches to assessment
Torrance, H. (1995) · Open University Press eBooks · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Empowerng or Ensnaring?: The Implications of Outcome‐based Assessment in Higher Education
Ecclestone, K. (1999) · Higher Education Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-2273.00111 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Self-citationAssessing competence in higher education
Edwards, A., & Knight, P. (1995) · Kogan Page eBooks · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Professional Competence And Higher Education: The ASSET Programme
Winter, R., & Maisch, M. (1996) · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Litigation and Learning: Tensions in improving university lecturers' assessment practice
Ecclestone, K., & Swann, J. (1999) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/09695949992801 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citationWinter, R. (1994) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0309877940180110 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Outcomes, Learning And The Curriculum
(2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203485835 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Assessment and Critical Autonomy in Post-compulsory Education in the UK
Ecclestone, K. (2000) · Journal of Education and Work · doi:10.1080/13639080050045006 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Self-citationEmpowering Lecturers: A Problem-Based Approach To Improve Assessment Practice.
Swann, J., & Arthurs, J. (1999) · Higher education review · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Quality assurance: a new approach.
Mapa, J., & Turner, G. (1984) · PubMed · Cited by 11 · see citing works
PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION
SH.Alaudinova (2022) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7261528 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- BROWN S., 1996, 500 Tips for Assessment
- ECCLESTONE K, 1999, Report for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
- 1995, Access to fair assessment
- GlBBS G., 1986, 53 Ways to assess your students
- HALLIDAY, J. Critical thinking and the academic/vocational divide. European Vocational Education and Training Research Proceedings of the VETNET programme at the European Educational Research Conference. September17-20, Enchede. Edited by: MULDER, M. Univesity of Twente.
- 1994, Assessing the prior learning of adults with overseas qualifications
- OTTER S., 1995, Assessing Competence in Higher Education
- PRYOR, J. and TORRANCE, H. Investigating and Developing Formative Teacher Assessment. Paper presented to the British Educational Research Association Conference. September, University of Sussex. 1999
- SWANN J., 1999, Higher Education Review, 31, 50
- 1992, Learning Outcomes in Higher Education
- WINTER R., 1995, Assessing Competence in Higher Education
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work
Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3 · Cited by 810 · see citing works
“…and teachers develop the equivalent of such scripts where knowledge about what makes for quality becomes linked through repeated exposure to work, consideration of standards (whether these are implicit or explicit) and the need to justify decisions (as assessors do post hoc (Ecclestone 2001)).”
BackgroundDeveloping Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide
Bloxham, S., & Boyd, P. (2007) · Insight (University of Cumbria) · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria
O'donovan *, B., Price, M., & Rust, C. (2004) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/1356251042000216642 · Cited by 300 · see citing works
“There was, and is, pressure for institutions to maintain high and consistent academic standards within the context of a massive expansion of higher education (Lucas & Webster, 1998), amplified by increasing student hunger for and expectations of high grades (Ecclestone, 2001).”
BackgroundInfluentialMarking and moderation in the UK: false assumptions and wasted resources
Bloxham, S. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930801955978 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
“Their judgements become more intuitive than conscious, as they develop ‘mental models’ of marking which they apply regardless of marking guidance (Ecclestone 2001).”
BackgroundInfluentialDaniels, J., & Brooker, J. (2014) · Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00131881.2013.874157 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
“The notion of students developing increasingly complex levels of understanding and knowledge application is already well accepted in the design of assessment criteria, where standards to be met within a programme across all year levels identify an identical or similar action, but will be worded to reflect the level of…”
BackgroundAssessment standards: the role of communities of practice and the scholarship of assessment
Price, M. (2005) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930500063793 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Mark my words: the role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices
Bloxham, S., Boyd, P., & Orr, S. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075071003777716 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
“From this perspective, written assessment criteria have limited power to secure national standards, as their interpretation will be determined locally (Knight 2006 ) by tutors drawing on their experience and, therefore, their differing tacit knowledge of disciplinary standards (Ecclestone 2001 ; Knight and Yorke 2003…”
BackgroundA Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education
(2003) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203416877 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Bloxham, S., den-Outer, B., Hudson, J., & Price, M. (2016) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1024607 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Developing student understanding of assessment standards: a nested hierarchy of approaches
O’Donovan, B. M., Price, M., & Rust, C. (2008) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562510801923344 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Assessment in universities: a critical review of research
Elton, L., & Johnston, B. (2002) · ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Summative assessment: dealing with the ‘measurement fallacy’
Yorke, M. (2010) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070903545082 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
“In a small-scale empirical study, Ecclestone (2001) found that novices were more rule-governed than competent or expert assessors, though the relationship between the level of competence of the assessor and the actual assessment outcomes was not clear-cut.”
BackgroundAssessment criteria: reflections on current practices
Woolf, H. (2004) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930310001689046 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Understanding variations between student and teacher application of rubrics
Li, J., & Lindsey, P. (2015) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2015.07.003 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Assessment for Experiential Learning
Chan, C. K. Y. (2022) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003018391 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Equity, justice and standards: assessment decision making in higher education
Stowell *, M. (2004) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930310001689055 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
“At the same time it is important to recognize that in practice, judgements are filtered through socialization into academic communities (Wolf, 1995; Ecclestone, 2001; Elton & Johnston, 2002).”
BackgroundInfluentialWhat makes marking reliable? Experiments with UK examinations
Baird, J., Greatorex, J., & Bell, J. F. (2004) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594042000304627 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
“Ecclestone (2001) considered assessment boards in Higher Education to be communities of academics and cites tacit knowledge as a feature of these communities.”
BackgroundSocial moderation, assessment and assuring standards for accounting graduates
Watty, K., Freeman, M. A., Howieson, B. A., Hancock, P., O'Connell, B. T., Lange, P. D., & Abraham, A. (2013) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.848336 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
“Other problems identified in the literature are that markers may ignore the set criteria (Ecclestone 2001; Price and Rust 1999; Smith and Coombe 2006); they may differ in their interpretations of criteria or they may have higher standards than those set by the institution (Price 2005).”
BackgroundReducing variation in the assessment of student writing
Hunter, K., & Docherty, P. (2009) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930903215842 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“Sadler (2005) and Ecclestone (2001) similarly argue that academics continue to employ tacit judgements regardless of induction into the assessment process by conventional means.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialAssessment moderation in an Australian context: processes, practices, and challenges
Beutel, D., Adie, L. E., & Lloyd, M. (2016) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1213232 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“Other problems with assessment grading in higher education contexts identified in previous research include markers developing fixed marking habits over time, and markers ignoring the assessment criteria (Ecclestone 2001; Smith and Coombe 2006).”
BackgroundBrooks, V. (2012) · Research Papers in Education · doi:10.1080/02671520903331008 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“Ecclestone (2001) is another proponent of the view that the judgments which underpin assessment are qualitatively different. Her study entailed some important differences from that undertaken by Suto and Greatorex (2008) yet her conclusions bear some striking similarities.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialFastré, G., van der Klink, M. R., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-009-9215-x · Cited by 47 · see citing works
“It is likely that when students know exactly what to do, their motivation, learning and performance will increase significantly (see for example Ecclestone 2001).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialAshworth, M., Bloxham, S., & PEARCE, L. M. (2010) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070903062864 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
“From this perspective, written assessment criteria have limited power to secure national standards, as their interpretation will be determined locally by tutors drawing on their experience and, therefore, their differing tacit knowledge of disciplinary standards (Price and Rust 1999; Ecclestone 2001; Knight and Yorke…”
BackgroundDoes calibration reduce variability in the assessment of accounting learning outcomes?
O'Connell, B. T., Lange, P. D., Freeman, M. A., et al. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1008398 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“In addition, assessors tend to rely on heuristics and ignore (or decide to not adopt) written criteria in rubrics (Price and Rust 1999; Ecclestone 2001; Smith and Coombe 2006; Sadler 2009).”
BackgroundStudents' Experiences and Perceptions of Peer Assisted Study Sessions: Towards Ongoing Improvement
van der Meer, J., & Scott, C. (2009) · Research Online (University of Wollongong) · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Quality assurance of assessment and moderation discourses involving sessional staff
Grainger, P., Adie, L. E., & Weir, K. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1030333 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
“Ecclestone (2001) concurred that this tacit knowledge contributed to experts demonstrating scepticism towards the collaborative moderation process as a way of securing reliable judgements.”
BackgroundDysthe, O., Engelsen, K. S., & Lima, I. (2007) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2007.10.002 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Bird, F. L., & Yucel, R. (2012) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.658155 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
“Inter-rater reliability may be influenced by teaching experience (Weigle 1999; Ecclestone 2001; Price 2005) and training (Weigle 1999).”
BackgroundResultConceptual acrobatics: talking about assessment standards in the transparency era
Hudson, J., Bloxham, S., den Outer, B., & Price, M. (2017) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1092130 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
“The external examiners distanced themselves from uncalibrated internalised standards, concurring, it seems, that ‘there is a fine balance between a genuine ability to recognize quality of work apparently intuitively, and erratic interpretation’ (Ecclestone 2001, 305).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGrading rubrics: hoopla or help?
Howell, R. (2014) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2013.785252 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
“It may be that, in consequence, these experienced graders may become more intuitive than conscious when grading, thereby not relying and adhering to a given grading rubric as closely as an instructor with less grading experience (Ecclestone, 2001).”
Backgroundvan der Meer, J., & Scott, C. (2008) · Research Online (University of Wollongong) · Cited by 28 · see citing works
The influence of reputation information on the assessment of undergraduate student work
Batten, J. C., Batey, J., Shafe, L., Gubby, L., & Birch, P. D. J. (2011) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.640928 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“In line with this contention, Ecclestone (2001) observed staff to ‘compensate’ for the assessment criteria in order to take into account their perception of the student’s application, conscientiousness, personal pressures, personal progress and contributions during tutorials.”
BackgroundWhy should we bother with assessment moderation?
Smith, C. (2011) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2011.10.010 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“They have the potential to motivate and improve learning along with improving the standard of work students produce (Ecclestone, 2001).”
BackgroundInfluentialTaylor, S., Ryan, M. E., & Pearce, J. M. (2015) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2015.1024625 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“…globally based on the quality of their teaching and learning outcomes (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2010), universities have prioritised the need for increased transparency in assessment practices (Ecclestone, 2001; Mansell, James & The Assessment Reform Group, 2009).”
BackgroundA Challenge to Established Assessment Practice
Elton, L. (2004) · Higher Education Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2273.2004.00259.x · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Gonsalves, C., & Lin, Z. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2381124 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“The dominant techno-rational transparency approach in higher education, driven by a push for accountability (Bearman and Ajjawi 2021; O’Donovan, Price, and Rust 2004) and the belief in explicit assessment representation (Ecclestone 2001), shapes current policies.”
Orr, S. (2011) · International Journal of Art & Design Education · doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01672.x · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“…certainly of technical stuff (JR) The fact that both lecturers appear to be ‘harder’ markers with students who pursue their area of practice appears to relate to the unconscious compensation tactics described by Ecclestone (2001) that can work for or (as in this case) against the student.”
BackgroundO'Hagan, S., & Wigglesworth, G. (2014) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.896890 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“There have been persistent concerns over the validity, reliability and fairness of assessment in HE (see for example, Ecclestone 2001; Fleming 1999; Knight 2002a; Yorke 2008, 2011), and James (2003, 197) argues that ‘assessment is possibly one of the least sophisticated aspects of university…”
BackgroundImproving personal voice in academic writing: an action inquiry using self-reflective practice
Logan, A. (2012) · Reflective Practice · doi:10.1080/14623943.2012.732937 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
van der Meer, J. (2011) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0309877x.2011.596195 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“Ecclestone (2001) argues that when students know what they are expected to do, their motivation, and standard of work will improve.”
BackgroundMenéndez-Varela, J.-L., & Gregori-Giralt, E. (2018) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.06.001 · Cited by 23 · 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…”
Orr, S. (2010) · Art Design & Communication in Higher Education · doi:10.1386/adch.9.1.5_1 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Assessment criteria for competency-based education: a study in nursing education
Fastré, G., van der Klink, M. R., Amsing-Smit, P., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-014-9326-5 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“This can also have positive effects on students’ motivation, learning and performance (Ecclestone 2001).”
BackgroundStudent Assessment from a Psychological Perspective
Elander, J. (2004) · Psychology Learning & Teaching · doi:10.2304/plat.2003.3.2.114 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“However, in one comparison between ‘novice’, ‘competent’ and ‘expert’ markers, the competent and expert markers had more changes made to the grades they awarded after double marking and moderation than did the novice markers (Ecclestone, 2001).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialProviding Exemplars in the Learning Environment: the Case for and against
Newlyn, D. (2013) · Universal Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.13189/ujer.2013.010104 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Bettany‐Saltikov, J., Kılınç, S., & Stow, K. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930802302196 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Assessment close up: The limits of exquisite descriptions of achievement
Knight, P., & Yorke, M. (2008) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2008.01.005 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Objectivité versus subjectivité dans l’évaluation des acquis des étudiants
Romainville, M. (2011) · Revue internationale de pédagogie de l’enseignement supérieur · doi:10.4000/ripes.499 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“Ainsi, si les enseignants sont assez unanimes pour identifier les critères pertinents pour classer les étudiants (l’analyse critique, par exemple), on observe que des comportements précis très différents sont retenus comme indicateurs de ce critère selon la discipline enseignée et même parfois selon les théories privi…”
BackgroundInfluentialde Vos, M., Baartman, L. K. J., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & de Bruijn, E. (2019) · Journal of Education and Work · doi:10.1080/13639080.2019.1696953 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“…assessment literature researchers have made a similar case for assessment as a social and collaborative practice when it comes to complex, open-ended assessment tasks, to enhance the quality of assessment through discussion and sharing experiences (Ecclestone 2001; Moss, Schutz, and Collins 1998).”
BackgroundTucker, R. (2011) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.604122 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“The adoption of explicit marking criteria, rubrics and taxonomies describing categories of achievement can all be adopted to counter these problems, but work has shown these methods can be undermined by marker’s fixed habits (Wolf 1995), by staff ignoring standards (Baume, Yorke, and Coffey 2004; Ecclestone 2001; Pric…”
BackgroundElshater, A. M. (2014) · International Journal of Architectural Research Archnet-IJAR · doi:10.26687/archnet-ijar.v8i3.302 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“…(Wright, 1991), Cuff, 1991), (Vernez-Moudon, 1992), (Lang, 1994, p. 255), (Alexander, Neis, Anninou, & King, 1987), (Duggan & Mitchell, 1997), (Ecclestone, 2001), (Gallaudet University, 2002), (Campbell, 2002, p. 9), (Creswell, 2003), (The Office of Academic Planning & Assessment, 2005),…”
0–39%: The beginning of an infrastructure of failure in academia
Turner, J. (2020) · Emotion, space and society · doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2019.100647 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Off the mark: Repetitive marking undermines essay evaluations due to boredom
Erturk, S., van Tilburg, W. A. P., & Igou, E. R. (2022) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-022-09929-2 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“Given limited resources, markers must often mark large numbers of essays while meeting specific deadlines and fulfilling other aspects of their profession (Bloxham, 2009; Ecclestone, 2001; Smith & Coombe, 2006).”
BackgroundInfluentialSocratic dialogue as personal reflection
Turnbull, W., & Mullins, P. (2007) · Reflective Practice · doi:10.1080/14623940601139012 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“My best intentions of allocating ‘research time’ have fallen foul of other competing demands and I’m afraid that other than ‘sorting’ of notes and articles into those that I may be using and those that I’ve decided that I won’t (including Ecclestone, 2001 ; Laugharne, 2002 ; and Rust, 2002 ), I haven’t done a great de…”
BackgroundRepresenting Scoring Rubrics as Graphs for Automatic Short Answer Grading
Condor, A., Pardos, Z. A., & Linn, M. C. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-11644-5_29 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Herbert, I. P., Joyce, J., & Hassall, T. (2014) · Accounting Education · doi:10.1080/09639284.2014.974195 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“However, ‘inherent quality’ can be a slippery concept, as indicated by the muchcoined saying ‘I know a 2:1 when I see it’ (Ecclestone, 2001).”
Study of the strategic decision making process in higher education institutions
AlDhaen, E. S. (2017) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Carter, A., & Bathmaker, A. (2016) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0309877x.2015.1135881 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“(Wolf 1993, 21) Subsequent studies drew similar conclusions (Ecclestone 2001; Price 2005).”
ResultDeveloping generic criteria and standards for assessment in law: processes and (by)products
Hughes, C., & Cappa, C. (2007) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930600898544 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“A growing body of literature around the experience of criterion-referenced assessment has elaborated on problematic as well as beneficial aspects (Greatorex, 1999; Price & Rust, 1999; Ecclestone, 2001; Rust, 2001; Dunn et al., 2002; Knight, 2002a, b; Hornby, 2003; Miller, 2003; Sadler, 2003, 2005; Taras, 2003; Orsmond…”
BackgroundAssessing the assessors: investigating the process of marking essays
Hasan, A., & Jones, B. (2024) · Frontiers in Oral Health · doi:10.3389/froh.2024.1272692 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Developing and Applying Level Descriptors
Greatorex, J. (2003) · Westminster Studies in Education · doi:10.1080/0140672032000147580 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Improving sustainable assessment skills in vocational education
Fastré, G. (2011) · DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Grainger, P. (2021) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.18.4.4 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Belluigi, D. Z. (2015) · Discourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education · doi:10.1080/01596306.2015.1075961 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“The adoption of such techno-rationalist discourses may have been in an attempt to avoid the conflation of ‘connoisseurship’ with absolute values (Hardy, 2006), elitism, unaccountability and mystery (Ecclestone, 2001).”
BackgroundJansson, M., Carle, J., Gunnarsson, A., & Ekbrand, H. (2017) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2017.1398227 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Baker, B. A., Homayounzadeh, M., & Arias, A. (2020) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100771 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Chen, C., Chang, H., Hsu, W., & Sheen, G. (2016) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1180663 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“Ecclestone (2001) suggested that well-designed assessment criteria can motivate students to improve the standard of work they produce. nonetheless, researchers continue to debate the reliability and validity of these moderation practices.”
BackgroundLearning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria in Urban Design: A Problematisation of Spatial Thinking
Hardinghaus, M. (2006) · Transactions · doi:10.11120/tran.2006.03020009 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Liao, L. (2022) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2022.2119076 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“A precise de fi nition of assessment criteria helps teachers draw more reliable judgement and make assessment more amendable to moderation, thereby enhancing the reliability of the assessment (Ecclestone 2001).”
BackgroundDaw, M. I. (2022) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2022.2134552 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Campbell, A. (2008) · Australasian Journal of Paramedicine · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Assessment of Theses in Design Education
Svenningsson, N., Faraon, M., & Villavicencio, V. (2021) · International Journal of Innovative Teaching and Learning in Higher Education · doi:10.4018/ijitlhe.294567 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Aslett, H. (2006) · London Met Repository (London Metropolitan University) · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Lavt sensorsamsvar – kan det bedres?
Bjølseth, G., Havnes, A., & Lauvås, P. (2011) · Uniped · doi:10.18261/issn1893-8981-2011-04-01 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Achievement matters: external peer review of accounting learning standards
Hancock, P., Freeman, M. A., Abraham, A., Lange, P. D., Howieson, B. A., O'Connell, B. T., & Watty, K. (2024) · RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) · doi:10.25439/rmt.27348552 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Feedback in Tertiary Education
van der Meer, J., & Dawson, P. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316832134.014 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Meese, T. S., & Hosie, C. A. (2026) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2026.2658630 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Using Rubrics for Language Assessment
Mendoza, L. E. (2023) · Advances in educational marketing, administration, and leadership book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-6086-3.ch001 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Accessing and Understanding the Tacit Dimensions of Assessment
Hugh‐Jones, S., Waterman, M. G., & Wilson, I. (2009) · Psychology Learning & Teaching · doi:10.2304/plat.2009.8.2.7 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“…of methodologically different studies, from judgement analysis to observations of meetings to interviews with staff, with the consequent use of other, nonpublished criteria (e.g., Baird, 2002; Crisp, 2007; Ecclestone, 2001; Greatorex, 2002; Yorke, Bridges, & Woolf, 2000; Webster et al., 2000).”
BackgroundInfluentialRone-Adams, S. A., & Naylor, S. (2009) · Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice · doi:10.46743/1540-580x/2009.1267 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Dobrić, N. (2023) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2023.103155 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Dobrić, N. (2024) · ELOPE English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries · doi:10.4312/elope.21.1.91-110 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“An analogous division is also posited by Cooksey, Freebody and Wyatt-Smith (2007), Ecclestone (2001), Keren and Teigen (2004), Lumley (2005), and Shirazi (2012), among others.”
BackgroundInfluentialBloxham, S., Boyd, P., Ashworth, M., & Orr, S. (2009) · Insight (University of Cumbria) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Teaching Peer Review Reflective Processes in Accounting
Taylor, S., & Ryan, M. E. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09271-3_8 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
McMullan, J. (2016) · Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
What Exactly Do You Want Me To Do? Analysis of a Criterion Referenced Assessment Project
Jewels, T., Ford, M., & Jones, W. (2007) · Journal of Information Technology Education Research · doi:10.28945/218 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Box (2004) and Eccleston (2001) suggest distributing samples of work to students showing different standards.”
Soden, W. (2013) · White Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Bennett, J. G. (2006) · London Met Repository (London Metropolitan University) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Wielgoszewska, B. (2016) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781526409713 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Macaulay, M. (2017) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781315692333-2 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Docherty, P., & Tse, H. (2010) · UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney)
Muñiz, A. S. G., & Moreno, B. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2166262
Actors, Networks and Assessment
Tummons, J. (2011) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-197-3.ch012
Design and Implementation of College Oral English Curriculum
Li, H. (2016) · International Conference on Education Technology, Management and Humanities Science (ETMHS) · doi:10.2991/etmhs-16.2016.143
Muñiz, A. S. G., & Vicente, M. R. (2013) · Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja)
What Exactly Do You Want Me To Do? Analysis of a Criterion Referenced Assessment Project
Jewels, T., Ford, M., & Jones, W. (2007) · Informing Science and IT Education Conference · doi:10.28945/3105
Enhancing the validity of teachers' summative judgments through decision frameworks
Darr, C. (2021) · Otago University Research Archive (University of Otago)
Towards a Taxonomy of Text Features Highly Indicative of Context-Appropriate L2 Writing CompetencePreprint
Sigott, G. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4508354
The Importance of Student Partnership in Rubric Construction, Discussion, and Evaluation
Laville, A., Thompson, L., Yue, Y., Hayward, A. J., & Grace-Bland, V. (2023) · Advances in educational marketing, administration, and leadership book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-6086-3.ch007
- Authors
- Ecclestone, K.
- Corresponding author
- Ecclestone, Kathryn
- Venue
- Journal of Further and Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2001-10
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 301-313
- ISSN
- 0309-877X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9486
- OpenAlex
- W2011389885
- Cited by
- 106
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 18.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Further and Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Keywords
- degree classification, evaluation criteria, external providers, academic standards, academic community, norm-referenced assessment, rating reliability, higher education assessment
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
