Same grade for different reasons, different grades for the same reason?

References

• Baume, D., M. Yorke, and M. Coffey. 2004. “What is Happening When We Assess, and How Can We Use Our Understanding of This to Improve Assessment?” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 29 (4): 451–477. doi:10.1080/02602930310001689037.
   Google Scholar
• Bearman, M., and R. Ajjawi. 2018. “From “Seeing through” to “Seeing with”: Assessment Criteria and the Myths of Transparency.” Frontiers in Education 3 (96): 1–8. doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00096.
   Google Scholar
• Bloxham, S., P. Boyd, and S. Orr. 2011. “Mark My Words: The Role of Assessment Criteria in UK Higher Education Grading Practices.” Studies in Higher Education 36 (6): 655–670. doi:10.1080/03075071003777716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloxham, S., B. den-Outer, J. Hudson, and M. Price. 2016. “Let’s Stop the Pretence of Consistent Marking: Exploring the Multiple Limitations of Assessment Criteria.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 41 (3): 466–481. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1024607.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Chetcuti, D., J. Cacciottolo, and N. Vella. 2022. “What Do Examiners Look for in a PhD Thesis? Explicit and Implicit Criteria Used by Examiners across Disciplines.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 47 (8): 1358–1373. doi:10.1080/02602938.2022.2048293.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbin, J. M Strauss, and A. L. 2008. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Golding, C., S. Sharmini, and A. Lazarovitch. 2014. “What Examiners Do: What Thesis Students Should Know.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39 (5): 563–576. doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.859230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger, P., K. Purnell, and R. Zipf. 2008. “Judging Quality through Substantive Conversations between Markers.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33 (2): 133–142. doi:10.1080/02602930601125681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger, P., and K. Weir. 2020. “The Significance of Rubrics.” In Assessing Learning in Higher Education Contexts Using Rubrics, edited by Grainger, P., & Weir, K., 1–8. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Haagsman, M., B. Snoek, A. Peeters, K. Scager, F. Prins, and M. van Zanten. 2021. “Examiners’ Use of Rubric Criteria for Grading Bachelor Theses.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 46 (8): 1269–1284. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1864287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harsch, C., and G. Martin. 2013. “Comparing Holistic and Analytic Scoring Methods: Issues of Validity and Reliability.” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 20 (3): 281–307. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2012.742422.
   Google Scholar
• Humphry, S. M., and S. A. Heldsinger. 2014. “Common Structural Design Features of Rubrics May Represent a Threat to Validity.” Educational Researcher 43 (5): 253–263. doi:10.3102/0013189X14542154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koris, R., and R. Pello. 2022. “We Cannot Agree to Disagree: Ensuring Consistency, Transparency and Fairness across Bachelor Thesis Writing, Supervision and Evaluation.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, (Ahead-of-Print): 1–12. doi:10.1080/02602938.2022.2125931.
   Google Scholar
• Mattsson, M. 2008. “Degree Projects and Praxis Development.” In Examining Praxis. Assessment and Knowledge Construction in Teacher Education, edited by Mattsson, M., Johansson, I., & Sandström, B., 55–76. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers..
   Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, S. R., and G. Wigglesworth. 2015. “Who’s Marking My Essay? The Assessment of Non-Native-Speaker and Native-Speaker Undergraduate Essays in an Australian Higher Education Context.” Studies in Higher Education 40 (9): 1729–1747. doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.896890.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reddy, Y. M., and H. Andrade. 2010. “A Review of Rubric Use in Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35 (4): 435–448. doi:10.1080/02602930902862859.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, D. R. 1989. “Formative Assessment in the Design of Instructional Systems.” Instructional Science 18 (2): 119–144. doi:10.1007/BF00117714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, D. R. 2005. “Interpretations of Criteria-Based Assessment and Grading in Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30 (2): 175–194.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, D. R. 2009. “Indeterminacy in the Use of Preset Criteria for Assessment and Grading.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34 (2): 159–179. doi:10.1080/02602930801956059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellbjer, S. 2017. “Meaning in Constant Flow: University Teachers’ Understanding of Examination Tasks.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 42 (2): 182–194. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1096900.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolpe, K., L. Björklund, M. Lundström, and M. Åström. 2021. “Different Profiles for the Assessment of Student Theses in Teacher Education.” Higher Education 82 (5): 959–976. doi:10.1007/s10734-021-00692-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swedish Research Council. 2017. Good Research Practice. Stockholm: Swedish Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Weir, K. 2020. “Understanding Rubrics.” In Assessing Learning in Higher Education Contexts Using Rubrics, edited by Grainger, P., & Weir, K., 9–24. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, L., and S. Kemp. 2019. “Independent Markers of Master’s Theses Show Low Levels of Agreement.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 44 (5): 764–771. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1535052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar