Criterion referenced assessment as a form of feedback: Student and staff perceptions in the initial stages of a new law degree

Abstract Criterion referenced assessment (CRA) has become the preferred method of grading in higher education institutions in recent years. There has been a substantial amount of academic literature over recent years that has attempted to advocate, explain or outline best practice for CRA. This paper explores academic and student participants’ perceptions of CRA and related marking practices based on a study focused on assessment practices in a new Australian regional law school. Existing research proposes two broad rationales for the use of CRA: to increase the reliability and validity of assessment practices; and to provide greater transparency within grading of assessment items for students. The aim of the research discussed here was to discover whether the stated rationales for CRA in the literature aligned with the perceptions of and uses by academic staff and students. Preliminary findings are based on a small, qualitative sample of staff and students. They suggest that, whilst academic participants’ valuing of CRA does echo some of the researched rationales, they more strongly value this practice because of the time efficiencies that the use of CRA and marking rubrics can achieve for the provision of feedback. This finding is important because it stands in possible conflict with perceptions of students in our study, who appeared to perceive criteria sheets or marking rubrics as being distinct from individualised feedback. Implications of our findings are discussed.

[1]  Clair Hughes,et al.  Developing generic criteria and standards for assessment in law: processes and (by)products , 2007 .

[2]  Susan M. Brookhart,et al.  How to give effective feedback to your students , 2008 .

[3]  Natalie Cuffe,et al.  Engaging Students in the Implementation of Criterion Referenced Assessment in First Year Law , 2006 .

[4]  Rodney McAdam,et al.  Grounded theory methodology and practitioner reflexivity in TQM research , 2001 .

[5]  D. Boud,et al.  Rethinking assessment in higher education : learning for the longer term , 2007 .

[6]  Sara Hammer.  Demonstrating Quality Outcomes in Learning and Teaching: Examining ‘Best practice’ in the Use of Criterion-referenced Assessment , 2007 .

[7]  M. Taras,et al.  To Feedback or Not to Feedback in Student Self-assessment , 2003 .

[8]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Interpretations of criteria‐based assessment and grading in higher education , 2005 .

[9]  R. Higgins,et al.  The Conscientious Consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning , 2002 .

[10]  Peter Ferguson,et al.  Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education , 2011 .

[11]  Bente Kristensen,et al.  Has External Quality Assurance Actually Improved Quality in Higher Education Over the Course of 20 Years of the ‘Quality Revolution’? , 2010 .

[12]  Chris Rust,et al.  The Student Experience of Criterion-Referenced Assessment (Through the Introduction of a Common Criteria Assessment Grid) , 2001 .

[13]  Chris Rust,et al.  The experience of introducing a common criteria assessment grid across an academic department , 1999 .

[14]  Kerri-Lee Krause,et al.  The first year experience in Australian universities: findings from 1994 to 2009 , 2010 .

[15]  Kathy Everts Danielson,et al.  Formative Feedback: Involving Students as Partners in Assessment to Enhance Learning , 2010 .

[16]  Chris Rust,et al.  Improving Students' Learning by Developing their Understanding of Assessment Criteria and Processes , 2003 .

[17]  Caroline Lodge,et al.  Gifts, ping-pong and loops – linking feedback and learning , 2004 .

[18]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Specifying and Promulgating Achievement Standards , 1987 .

[19]  David Boud,et al.  Reframing assessment as if learning were important , 2007 .