2015
DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2015.1017754
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can a systematic assessment moderation process assure the quality and integrity of assessment practice while supporting the professional development of casual academics?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, it is through the interaction between members of the marking team that not only supports colleagues in consistently assessing requirements and outcomes but also provides a more holistic perspective of the assessment process (Beutel et al , 2017). In addition, meetings and communication between markers facilitate the development of relationships (Grainger et al , 2015) and allow the exchange of expectations between the assessment setter and those marking (Crimmins et al , 2016). It is this development of an assessment community that Bloxham et al (2016) felt can lead to greater reliability of marking, more than merely focusing on assessment criteria.…”
Section: Discussion Of the Professional Association Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, it is through the interaction between members of the marking team that not only supports colleagues in consistently assessing requirements and outcomes but also provides a more holistic perspective of the assessment process (Beutel et al , 2017). In addition, meetings and communication between markers facilitate the development of relationships (Grainger et al , 2015) and allow the exchange of expectations between the assessment setter and those marking (Crimmins et al , 2016). It is this development of an assessment community that Bloxham et al (2016) felt can lead to greater reliability of marking, more than merely focusing on assessment criteria.…”
Section: Discussion Of the Professional Association Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dramatic increase in the number of candidates undertaking these degrees (both the traditional PhD and the Professional Doctorate are referred to in this article as HDR) has been estimated by the OECD (2014) at thirty-eight per cent since 2000. It is important to note that the increased enrolments in HDR study has occurred within this university sector that has become increasingly dependent on casual labour (Kimber, 2003;Ryan, Burgess, Connell, & Groen, 2013) and has not increased the numbers of tenured research-active academic staff qualified to supervise HDRs in response to these increased candidate numbers (Crimmins et al, 2016;Forsyth, 2014;Hamilton, Thomas, Carson, & Ellison, 2014).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While more research is needed to balance workload challenges, overall, this article highlights the importance of a shared understanding of marking criteria for quality assurance. This is particularly important in an Australian context where the majority of teaching academics are casually employed, with less opportunity for professional development (Crimmins et al, 2016). Future research should focus on the implementation of audio feedback for community building, as well as enhancing shared understanding.…”
Section: On-going Development Of Marker Expertisementioning
confidence: 99%