The use of assessment criteria to ensure consistency of marking: some implications for good practice
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684889810220465 |
| Pages | 162-171 |
| Published date | 01 September 1998 |
| Date | 01 September 1998 |
| Author | Mark N.K. Saunders,Susan M. Davis |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Introduction
Widespread concern has been expressed over
assessment practices in higher education
(Balla and Boyle, 1994). In part this concern
has focused on the need for greater account-
ability of lecturers and on ensuring consisten-
cy of standards (for example Aper et al., 1990;
Brown et al., 1995; HMSO, 1991; Norton,
1990). Consistency of standards in assess-
ment is important for all assessed work. It
incorporates issues such as the subjectivity of
the individual lecturer, uniformity between
lecturers for a single piece of work and ensur-
ing the same standards across pieces of work
from similar modules for different courses
including those in other higher education
institutions.
Modules with low student numbers are
typically taught and assessed by one or per-
haps two lecturers. For modules with high
student numbers the number of lecturers
involved in assessing the work is likely to be
larger. As the size of the team expands so the
difficulties associated with achieving and
maintaining consistency of assessment
between lecturers becomes more apparent.
However, without agreement the quality, and
indeed the validity, of the results derived from
assessments of students will be questionable
(Balla and Boyle, 1994). The need to ensure
consistency is further emphasised by modules
where assessment is through one large piece
of course work such as a dissertation or pro-
ject. Since such modules can account for up
to 25 per cent of the marks awarded in a year,
any inconsistencies will almost certainly be
reflected in students’ overall grade for the year
and ultimately the final degree classification.
In this paper we outline the development
and use of assessment criteria for dissertations
with our undergraduate management stu-
dents. Within this we focus in particular upon
the implications of this for consistency
between lecturers. Data from two workshops
in which lecturers assessed the same under-
graduate dissertation, using the criteria, are
analysed, along with lecturer and student
feedback. The findings are subsequently set in
the context of previous research and issues
relating to assessment consistency and the use
of criteria discussed. We conclude with a
162
Quality Assurance in Education
Volume 6 · Number 3 · 1998 · pp. 162–171
© MCB University Press · ISSN 0968-4883
The use of assessment
criteria to ensure
consistency of marking:
some implications for
good practice
Mark N.K. Saunders and
Susan M. Davis
The authors
Mark N.K. Saunders is Research Co-ordinator for the
Department of Business and Finance at Cheltenham &
Gloucester College of Higher Education. He is Dissertation
Module Tutor for the Management Degree Fields and a
Principal Lecturer in the Department’s Division of Human
Resource Management.
Susan M. Davis is a Principal Lecturer and the Head of the
Finance Division in the Department of Business and
Finance at Cheltenham & Gloucester College of Higher
Education. She is also Field Chair for the Management
Degree Fields.
Abstract
Discusses the use of criteria in assessment of undergradu-
ate dissertations. Illustrates how criteria can integrate
both analytical and global quality measures of students’
work. Drawing from an analysis of assessments of an
undergraduate dissertation argues that criteria need to be
debated periodically if consistency is to be maintained.
Highlights the importance of clear assessment procedures
and emphasises that these procedures need not constrain
lecturers. Concludes with discussion of implications for
good practice in assessment. Appendices provide an
example of an assessment procedure and criteria.
The authors would like to thank Dr Philip Lewis
and the anonymous referees for their comments on
earlier drafts.
To continue reading
Request your trial