2,280
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Applying Sadler’s principles in holistic assessment design: a retrospective account

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Received 17 Feb 2023, Accepted 23 Jun 2023, Published online: 10 Aug 2023

References

  • Ajjawi, R., M. Bearman, and D. Boud. 2021. Performing standards: A critical perspective on the contemporary Use of standards in assessment. Teaching in Higher Education 26, no. 5: 728–41. doi:10.1080/13562517.2019.1678579.
  • Boud, D., P. Dawson, M. Bearman, S. Bennett, G. Joughin, and E. Molloy. 2018. Reframing assessment research: through a practice perspective. Studies in Higher Education 43, no. 7: 1107–18. doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1202913.
  • Campion, G.C. 2016. ‘The learning never ends’: exploring teachers’ views on the transition from general English to EAP. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 23: 59–70. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2016.06.003.
  • Ding, A., and I. Bruce. 2017. The English for academic purposes practitioner: operating on the edge of academia. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Dreyfus, S.J., S. Humphrey, A. Mahboob, and J.R. Martin. 2015. Genre Pedagogy in Higher Education: The SLATE Project. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Feldman, J., A. Rechnitzer, and E. Yeager. 2016-21. CLP-1 differential calculus. Department of Mathematics, UBC. http://www.math.ubc.ca/~CLP/CLP1/.
  • Halliday, M.A.K., and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. 2013. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
  • Ling, S.J., J. Sanny, and W. Moebs. 2018. University physics. Houston: OpenStax.
  • Martin, J.R., and D. Rose. 2007. Working with discourse: meaning beyond the clause,1st edition). London: Bloomsbury.
  • Martin, J.R., and D. Rose. 2008. Genre relations: mapping culture. Equinox Pub.
  • Monbec, L., N. Tilakaratna, M. Brooke, S.T. Lau, Y.S. Chan, and V. Wu. 2021. Designing a rubric for reflection in nursing: A legitimation code theory and systemic functional linguistics-informed framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1157–1172. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1855414.
  • Panadero, E., and A. Jonsson. 2020. A critical review of the arguments against the Use of rubrics. Educational Research Review 30: 100329. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100329.
  • Sadler, D.R. 1987. Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education 13, no. 2: 191–209.
  • Sadler, D.R. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18, no. 2: 119–44.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2005. Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30, no. 2: 175–94. doi:10.1080/0260293042000264262.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2007. Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment criteria. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 14, no. 3: 387–92. doi:10.1080/09695940701592097.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2009a. Transforming holistic assessment and grading into a vehicle for complex learning. In Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education, ed. Gordon Joughin, 1–19. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2009b. Indeterminacy in the Use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34, no. 2: 159–79. doi:10.1080/02602930801956059.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2010. Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35, no. 6: 727–43. doi:10.1080/02602930902977756.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2011. Academic freedom, achievement standards and professional identity. Quality in Higher Education 17, no. 1: 85–100. doi:10.1080/13538322.2011.554639.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2013. Assuring academic achievement standards: from moderation to calibration. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 20, no. 1: 5–19. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2012.714742.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2014. The futility of attempting to codify academic achievement standards. Higher Education 67, no. 3: 273–88. doi:10.1007/s10734-013-9649-1.
  • Sadler, D. Royce. 2015. “Backwards assessment explanations: implications for teaching and assessment practice.” In Assessment in music education: from policy to practice, edited by Don Lebler, Gemma Carey, and Scott D. Harrison, 16:9–19. Landscapes: The arts, Aesthetics, and education. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2016. Three In-course assessment reforms to improve higher education learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 41, no. 7: 1081–99. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1064858.
  • Sadler, D.R. 2020. Assessment tasks as curriculum statements: A turn to attained outcomes. The Japanese Journal of Curriculum Studies 29: 101–9.
  • Shoecraft, K., J.L. Martin, and G. Perris. 2022. EAP learners as discourse analysts: empowering emergent multilingual students. BC TEAL Journal 7, no. 1: 23–41. doi:10.14288/bctj.v7i1.452.
  • Stewart, J.J., D. Gates, M. Wolf, A. Bertram, L. Burtnick, S. Chong, K. Melzak, et al. 2020. Chemistry 110/111 and 120/121 integrated resource package 2020-2021. UBC Department of Chemistry.
  • Tai, J., R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, P. Dawson, and E. Panadero. 2018. Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education 76, no. 3: 467–81. doi:10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3.
  • Tian, X. 2013. Distinguish spoken English from written English: rich feature analysis. English Language Teaching 6, no. 7: 72–78.
  • To, V. 2017. Grammatical intricacy in EFL textbooks. International Journal of English Language Education 5, no. 2: 127–40. doi:10.5296/ijele.v5i2.12087.
  • Walton, J. 2020. “Making the grade: theorising musical performance assessment.” PhD diss. Griffith University.