Search

The online classroom introduces a sense of anonymity unlike that in the physical classroom. In some ways, online education seems as if it could be more equitable or even free from racism because physical characteristics are mostly absent from which racialized judgments are made. However, students' feelings about how technology afforded anonymity do not always indicate online education is free of identity bias or racialization. This mixed-methods study investigates students' feelings (n = 174) about fair grading practices and anonymity in undergraduate online classes. Findings suggest that online students perceive anonymity, and their identities factor into grading, in both positive and negative ways. Rubrics and clear expectations can help alleviate concern over unfair grading practices. Institutions intent on offering online instruction should not rely on students' perceptions of anonymity to create equitable learning environments.

Teacher workload is an important policy concern in many education systems around the world, often considered a contributory factor in teacher attrition. One aspect of workload that could be addressed is reducing the amount of written marking and feedback that teachers do. This article reports on the results of an evaluation of FLASH Marking, an intervention aimed at reducing teachers' marking workload. FLASH Marking is a code-based feedback approach involving peer- and self-assessment, reducing the need to use alphanumeric grading while promoting the use of students' metacognitive skills. The study involved a single cohort of 18,500 Key Stage 4 pupils (aged 14/15 at the start of the trial) and their English teachers (n = 990) in 103 secondary schools in England. The impact of the intervention was estimated as the difference in before and after measures of teacher workload, comparing teachers in 52 intervention schools and those in 51 control schools. The results suggest that the intervention had the effect of lessening teachers' workload by reducing their working hours (effect size 0.16), including hours spent on marking and feedback (0.17). The intervention was largely implemented as designed and teachers were generally positive about the potential impact of FLASH on pupils' learning outcomes.

Alternative grading methods, such as standards-based grading, provide students multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of the learning outcomes in a course. These grading methods allow for more flexibility and help promote a growth mindset by embracing constructive failure for students. Implementation of these alternative grading methods requires developing specific, transparent, and assessable standards. Moving away from traditional methods also requires a mindset shift for how both students and instructors approach assessment. While providing multiple opportunities is important for learning in any course, these methods are particularly relevant to an upper level mathematical statistics course where topics covered often provide an additional challenge for students as they lie at the intersection of both theory and application. By providing multiple opportunities, students have the space for constructive failure as they tackle learning both a conceptual understanding of statistics and the supporting mathematical theory. In this article we share our experiences--including both challenges and benefits for students and instructors--in implementing standards-based grading in the first semester of a mathematical statistics course (i.e., focus primarily on probability). Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

Purpose: Lack of appropriate student support and drawbacks in academic progression signify the importance of enhancing assessment and feedback in higher education (HE). Although assessment and feedback are significant in HE, minimal empirical research holistically explores the best practices. This study aims to address the niche and develop a decisive guideline for enhancing assessment setting and feedback provision within HE curricula. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic approach was taken to obtain data for the study: a literature review underpinning the thematic content analysis of study documents, followed by semi-structured interviews. Document analysis contained mid-module reviews/student feedback; rubrics used in assessment; and formative/summative feedback provided for the graded work. Documental analysis informed the key attributes of the semi-structured interview. Interpretive structural modelling (ISM) analysis identified the influence and reliance of each driver. Findings: This study revealed 15 drivers - 4 fundamental, 6 significant and 5 important - for enhancing assessment and feedback. The level partitioning from the ISM analysis established that all assessment and feedback needs to be underpinned by the university policy and fed into the assessment regime and marking scheme. This study identified that National Student Survey results were significantly improved due to implementing said drivers compared with the national and sector benchmarks. Practical implications: The developed drivers enable the best practices in assessment setting and feedback provision. The level partition diagram can be used as a decisive guideline or a provisional framework in assessment and feedback provision for quality assurance in HE. Originality/value: This study is one of, if not the only, to develop a guideline for signposting drivers and their influence and reliance to enhance assessment and feedback in a holistic HE setting. The developed drivers and the level partition diagram bring novelty and add to the current body of knowledge.

Research on faculty emotions is scarce, despite their evident relevance for faculty well-being, higher education quality, and student outcomes. The present studies aimed to investigate six discrete emotions (enjoyment, pride, boredom, anxiety, anger, frustration) faculty may experience during grading. Study 1 compared faculty emotions for grading with emotions for research and teaching (US sample, N = 1226). Mean comparisons showed that grading generally elicited less positive and more negative emotions than research and teaching. Study 2 further examined faculty emotions for grading through the lens of control-value theory, by identifying emotion-specific appraisal patterns in two countries (US, n = 244 and Germany, n = 201). Multiple linear regressions revealed that the most consistent predictor for grading emotions across both samples was cost, in terms of the extent to which faculty perceived grading as a thankless task that kept them away from more meaningful tasks. Our findings further point to the important role of faculty-student relationships and faculty members' confidence in their grading ability for eliciting grading emotions. This study extends existing research on emotions in higher education by considering grading as a relevant emotion-inducing task, and by applying control-value theory to a new context in two countries, thereby contributing to the question of this theory's generalizability. Practical implications of our findings entail that universities should aim to improve the circumstances of grading and equip their faculty with the means to handle their grading duties well, to optimize their somewhat worrisome emotional experiences in this context.

Background: Academic role (undergraduates, professors) and institutional context (liberal arts colleges, research universities) may affect how ethical psychology professors' behaviors seem. Objective: This study assessed whether academic role and institutional context related to ratings of professorial behaviors' ethicality. Method: A national sample (N = 608) rated 70 professorial behaviors (e.g., "unethical in virtually all circumstances to ethical in virtually all circumstances") across four domains: teaching, grading, relationships, and professional procedure. Results: G-test of independence analyses yielded differences across academic role (student, professor) for 57% of teaching behaviors, 50% of grading behaviors, 63% of relationship behaviors, and 52% of professional procedure behaviors, although the difference was often a matter of degree rather than kind (ethical or unethical). Differences across institution type (liberal arts college, research university) were largest for relationship behaviors (25%) compared with teaching, grading, and policy behaviors (5%, 0%, 4%, respectively). Conclusion: The data highlight the need for professors' transparency and reinforce calls for the APA Ethics Code to consider context when defining ethical standards for psychologists' behaviors. Teaching Implications: The data set can enhance undergraduate education about the APA Ethics Code and spark discussion about sampling (e.g., limitations of this study are homogenous samples, including high-achieving undergraduates).

Holistic judgement is an appealing approach for many assessment contexts due to its perceived simplicity and efficiency. However, it has been somewhat under-explored conceptually. Drawing on examples from assessment contexts including vocational performance, comparative judgement and the use of holistic judgement in teacher assessment for high stakes grading, we explicate a three-part definition of what holistic judgement constitutes. Holistic judgements result in singular outputs, derive from a comprehensive consideration of relevant constructs and acknowledge that the elements considered within them interconnect. However, holistic judgements may be made using considerably different processes by different judges without contravening this definition, and the ways in which different elements are weighted may vary. We then explore some factors, specific to assessment contexts, that might make holistic judgements more challenging, including materials being very different from one another, non-uniform candidate performance across materials and the presence of construct-irrelevant material. We set this assessment-specific discussion in the context of literatures on decision-making in psychology, medicine and other contexts. We conclude with some recommendations for when holistic judgement should and should not be used, and how holistic judgements can be made less cognitively challenging through the use of appropriate guidance and feedback to judges.

This study explores how assessment criteria are applied in grading student work. It is found that explicit assessment criteria do not work as authoritative guidance as expected and that tacit criteria are more decisive in awarding a certain grade. Various sources that form idiosyncratic tacit criteria are identified. These sources, including values on curriculum and assessment, teaching experiences, and the way of supervising grades, work as different social contextual elements that influence judgements on grading students' work. The study suggests that tacit criteria and the different sources that form the tacit criteria need to be identified, perceived, and communicated in the community of practice to reduce grade variability and achieve a shared understanding of grading.

This paper examines the presence of systematic differences in teachers' grading behaviour across gender and whether these can be attributed to teacher bias. This study measures these differences by comparing teachers' grades with national exams, which are externally and anonymously marked. Consistent with the literature, the gender gap in teacher grading is against boys. Using a dataset with gender gaps at class-subject level -- which allows to follow teachers in different classes over time -- this study shows that teachers' grading behaviour is not persistent across classes. Results suggest that gender grading gaps are explained by differences in students' behaviour.

In this study, we analyzed student participation and success in a college-level Calculus I course that utilized standards-based grading. By measuring the level to which students participate in this class structure, we were able to use a clustering algorithm that revealed multiple groupings of students that were distinct based on activity throughout the semester. Additionally, we analyzed student progress, defined as the number of graded activities successfully completed each week. We found that students who progressed steadily throughout the semester, and thus had lower variability in the number of completed activities per week, tended to receive a higher overall grade. Students whose progress was less consistent, and thus exhibited higher variability in weekly activities completed, tended to receive a lower grade. Overall, this shows a relationship between understanding the expectations in standards-based grading and succeeding in a course.

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to address the need for a robust system to accurately determine a cutoff score by using the Angoff method and leveraging the Rasch infit and outfit statistics of item response theory by detecting and removing misfitting items in a test. Design/methodology/approach: Researchers in educational evaluation support the use of grades as a complete measure to evaluate students' overall academic performance. In higher education, determining cutoff scores is crucial for assessing academic progress and achievement. Higher education institutions worldwide set predefined minimal standards of success, sometimes referred to as cutoff thresholds. These thresholds serve as benchmarks for assessing performance quality and determining eligibility for academic credit or advancement. Findings: The proposed approach combines the Angoff method with Rasch item fit statistics to precisely determine the cutoff score by excluding items that do not fit well (misfitting items) in a test. This methodology holds the potential to enhance the fairness and accuracy of grading practices, ensuring that assessments align with educational objectives and provide meaningful feedback to students. Originality/value: The value of this research extends to various fields where cutoff scores are used for decision-making purposes. By using Rasch item fit statistics and the Angoff method, practitioners and researchers can enhance the quality and validity of their assessments.

This study explores student perceptions of, and experiences with, labor-based contracting grading--an approach to student assessment that values labor rather than quality. In theory, labor-based contract grading reduces teacher bias and challenges inequities maintained by traditional grading. A qualitative content analysis of anonymous online surveys was conducted to gain insights from students on its effectiveness. These surveys revealed the following themes: decrease in stress, promotion of risk taking, pursuit of own passions, course clarity, fairer system, and decrease in effort. Understanding how students perceive labor-based contract grading, including its possibilities and limitations, can better inform instructors on best practices if considering adopting such an assessment approach.

Standards-based grading is an alternative grading method with many claimed benefits. This paper reports on quantitative studies investigating several of these oft-made anecdotal claims, such as reducing students' test anxiety and fostering a growth mindset. We found that standards-based grading did reduce students' test anxiety; moreover, the typically found difference in test anxiety between male and female students was eliminated in standards-based grading courses. We found no change in students' growth mindset, but that students' mastery avoidance goals were reduced.

Recent developments of higher teacher education in Tanzania have witnessed high student enrolments necessitating change of an emphasis from individual assessment to group-based assessment practices. In this context, informed by the constructivist philosophical perspective, this article reports on the pre-service teachers' voices regarding the prevalence, impacts and counteractive strategies of social loafing. The pre-service teachers are drawn from one higher education institution in Tanzania that serves as a case study. It draws on qualitative data collected from a sample of purposively selected undergraduate pre-service teachers. The study found social loafing tendencies to be commonplace and with far-reaching consequences amongst students as they engaged in group-based assessment tasks, hence calling for measures to redress them. Addressing social loafing in higher teacher education is crucial to avoid compromising the quality of assessment practices in the contexts of ever-rising student enrolments in many lower income countries.

Alternative approaches to assessment in education (many of which are linked to inclusive and antiracist pedagogies) are gaining in popularity across the board, from PK--12 to higher education (Esquivel, 2021; St. Amour, 2020). One such antiracist assessment strategy is using labor-based grading contracts (LBGCs), popularized by Inoue (2019; see also Syracuse University College of Arts & Sciences, n.d.). In these contracts, students and teachers together enter into an agreement in which they acknowledge that student effort and labor (i.e., the amount of time, intensity, or application students put into their writing) are the major factors that count in the outcome of an assignment. This article examines the use of LBGCs as a chance for teachers to address student learning and feedback/response through an assessment that does not "inadvertently perpetuate achievement and opportunity gaps" (Yoshimoto-Towery & Pedro, as cited in Esquivel, 2021). Furthermore, building response into the LBGC process gives students more opportunity to engage with classroom expectations for feedback and response and to interrogate response paradigms through an antiracist lens.

Assigning grades is conventionally the exclusive, lonely terrain of the instructor, even as other aspects of responding to student writing are collaborative. As an alternative that promotes student engagement and agency, labor-based contract grading is used in a growing number of writing classrooms. This article describes an alternative: evidence-based, student-led grading, an option that foregrounds students' own response to their writing in the form of evidence-based interpretation and use arguments for their grades. This approach foregrounds students' own response to their writing (in the form of evidence-based interpretation and use arguments for their grades). It engages students in the process of assessment, in this case, in appraising not only their labor but also their writing process and the writing they produce. First, I briefly describe themes and challenges in conventional grading and in contract-based grading. Then, I offer context and example material for evidence-based student interpretation and use arguments for summative grades. I close with limitations and ongoing considerations.

As labor-based grading contracts gain momentum in first-year writing classrooms, new kinds of response to writing take center stage. We explore how session notes composed by embedded peer tutors and students become rich tools in a writing process and create a gateway to the writing center for first-year students. By reading session notes in conversation with students' reflective writing, we put forward three key findings: Students articulate a relationship between building confidence in their writing and their willingness to seek, receive, and value feedback; students discuss how the labor required for an A pushed them to access and learn about resources outside of the classroom; and students interact with the writing center during their first semester of college, building long-term relationships with peers and with the writing center (including becoming staff members) beyond first-year writing.

The study investigated student reaction to the alternative mechanics survey (AMS), a modified force concept inventory, which used automatically marked free-response questions and offered limited feedback to students after their answers had been submitted. Eight participants were observed in completing the AMS, and they were interviewed to gain insight into what had been observed; the resultant data set was analyzed by thematic analysis. This revealed six key themes: "use of free-response questions supported deep learning", "interpretation of the AMS instructions affected answer length", "the idea of being marked by a computer did not affect answer structure", "participant reaction to the usability of the AMS was mostly positive", "reactions to the AMS depended upon what participants thought it was for", and "limited feedback was a useful addition to the AMS". Participants gave answers of differing length, being guided by the question wording as well as by their own preferences. It was found that participants valued being given feedback on their performance. Participants reacted positively to the free-response questions and could see potential for the use of this question type, opening up possibilities for the use of automatically marked free-response questions in concept inventories in the future.

Bimodal grade distributions indicate a gap in learning, where the highest quartile of students is skilful in the subject matter, but the lowest quartile is not retaining course material that demonstrates a good level of understanding. Students in the lower quartile do not necessarily have the same challenges as remedial students (i.e., those that do not meet the minimum course requirement) and should therefore be directed differently. We suggest that it is important to consider which elements of the course can be modified to reduce or eliminate bimodality. We provide here an approach to detect bimodality, explore the causes, and provide potential solutions that could be applied to any course. Our case study is on a third-year biochemistry course where several semesters showed a bimodal grade distribution. While student composition and timing of the course may have contributed to this result, underlying causes that can be controlled by the instructor include the lack of student engagement and academic motivation. Increasing the opportunities to earn marks and receive feedback, adding online components using social media, implementing seminars, and training teaching assistants to lead seminars can help reduce this problem.

This SoTL project explored sources of student anxiety and motivation across student assessment conditions of traditional numerical grading and pass/fail grading and sought to determine if pass/fail grading was helpful in lowering student anxiety while increasing student motivation to learn. Results indicated that students scored equally well on a test of student learning across pass/fail and numerical grading groups, indicating that pass/fail grading did not lead to poorer course objective mastery. Students were similar in terms of sources of anxiety and levels of anxiety. Motivation across groups was also similar, largely extrinsic in nature, and consistent pre- to post-course. Results coupled with subjective instructor reflection provide some, yet weak, support for the use of pass/fail grading in helping to ease course-related anxiety (at least for some) while still facilitating student development toward course learning goal mastery.

The move to institution-wide adoption of online submission, feedback and grading is increasing significantly within the Higher Education sector. This transition is predominantly driven by the need to improve the student assessment experience, but some institutions now also cite the need to improve the staff assessment experience. Existing studies, however, provide seemingly contradictory evidence surrounding this online marking experience. This article adopts a mixed methods approach to explore academic staff preferences of the assessment experience within a UK-based institution following adoption of online submission, feedback and grading during 2017-2018. It finds that although the majority of colleagues prefer to mark and provide feedback online, the process of marking electronically is highly individual. Online marking is not just a single practice but a set of varied, rich approaches, influenced by individual marker perceptions, preferences and previous experiences, and is often highly emotive. Changes to existing marking practices are seen simultaneously as both challenging and liberating by cohorts of markers. Drawing on the results of a detailed staff survey, this article identifies seven themes that are influential to that experience. These findings have significant implications for how institutions manage change to large-scale adoption of online marking.

In this essay we discuss an iterative, reflective writing assignment (the "learning charter") as a way to understand how high-achieving students experienced an ungrading learning environment. Working with evidence from student written reflection and in-class conversations, we chronicle how students articulated their perspectives on this approach through the fifteen-week semester. Our findings indicate that despite initial uncertainty, students found the environment to be one that promoted learning for the sake of learning, cultivated mental wellness, and compelled them to pursue meaningful questions about their own educational goals and experience. While this development was not without feelings of conflict and struggle throughout the course, by the end of it, students reported a renewed focus on the value of learning. We suggest that the strategies employed in this course might be successfully adopted in or adapted to other courses for high-achieving students, as well as other student populations.

Speaking in public involves three parts: an act, a process, and art; however, stage fright is a common dilemma for students across all proficiency levels and cultural orientations. In this paper, some critical factors of successful public speaking affecting both students' self-scoring and the professor's grading of in-class presentations were scrutinized using a likert-based survey method with quantitative and qualitative results. Specifically, areas investigated were anxiety, gestures and facial expressions, voice tone and relaxed attitude or behavior, spontaneity, and planned organization of delivery. It was found by the professors in this course that there are no statistically significant values or differences between students' self-evaluation and actual delivery in the five factors or aspects of their public speaking performances. However, whether the differences are huge or tiny, the resulting report of our research was informative, as the differences provide the vehicle for understanding some issues in teaching and learning which require further attention and reconciliation in a public speaking class. This paper offers insights to guide teachers and students in carrying out their goals and objectives more realistically in public speaking classes by examining student perspectives on public speaking in the target language.

Purpose: The present study explored experiences of former markers of undergraduate assignments and examinations at the University of South Africa (Unisa). Methodology: Qualitative method of research was used to gather data. Colaizzi's method (1978) was used to analyze and interpret data. The article's frame of reference was informed by Mezirow's transformative learning theory which is aligned to critical theory (Mezirow 2009). Findings: Findings were based on the following: Demographic information, markers' experiences in marking assignments and exam books, content knowledge, markers' meetings, duration of marking assignments and examination books as well as students support, and suggestions are the themes that emerged from the data that was gathered. Originality: It is recommended that the university must develop a policy for external markers for marking assignments and examinations of undergraduate program. All E-tutors must be trained to support students after the official closure of registration and before examinations are set. All markers must be trained -- through a markers' guide -- to mark assignments and examination books.

The purpose of this article is to review the literature on the issue of grading as a method and technique of expressing students' performance in terms of school reality. Initially, a growing concern about the role of assessment of student's performance in the learning and, generally, in the educational process, is highlighted. Subsequently, the role of student's performance is approached regarding the methodological issue of measurement and its efficiency in educational and social reality in general. Great importance is given to the pedagogical content of the assessment of students' performance in association with the educational process and operation of the school. Then, the main issue is discussed referring to the means of expressing, describing, and presenting the outcome of student assessment with a specific reference to quantitative means and specifically to grading. In the last part of this paper, empirical research findings are used to point out the disadvantages of this specific technique. In particular, a reference is made to the errors observed in its use, which pose an important issue of validity, reliability, and objectivity and therefore of its dispute, as well as to the impact on the learning process and the student him/herself. The article concludes with the final notes on the subject.

The purpose of this research is to adapt the Teacher Perceptions of Grading Practices Scale into Turkish and to examine the measurement invariance. This scale, which examines teachers' perceptions of grading methods, has six components: importance, usefulness, student effort, student ability, teachers' grading patterns, and perceived self-efficacy of the grading process. Before adapting the scale, permission was first acquired from the researcher who developed it. To ensure linguistic comparability, bilingual translators were recruited in the second phase. The semantic, experiential, conceptual, and idiomatic equivalence between the two variants of the scale were evaluated. The original and adapted scales were administered to a group of English teachers twice at a predetermined interval, and the consistency between the two applications was analyzed due to the fact that the language employed in the original test was a widely spoken group. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to examine the factor structure of the original scale. Cronbach's [alpha] and McDonald's [omega] coefficients were calculated for the reliability of the data obtained from the scale. Finally, the measurement invariance of the scale according to gender was examined by using Multiple Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFA), and it was determined that the measurement model fulfilled the criteria of complete gender-group invariance.

The research and data aim to (a) examine instructors' evaluation of Microsoft Teams as reflected in their teaching at the Public Authority for Applied Education and Training (PAAET) and (b) identify significant correlation between three determinants of the Technology Acceptance Model: perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and attitudes towards use (ATU). The researchers used a self-report survey answered by 230 instructors from multiple departments at the College of Basic Education. Several statistical tools examined mean differences. The research found that the instructors at PAAET highly rate Microsoft Teams. Perceived usefulness directly affected attitudes towards use while perceived ease of use (PEOU) indirectly affected attitudes towards use.

This study investigated lecturers' perception of contributory pension scheme implementation and job commitment in South-South Nigerian universities. To guide the study, two research questions and one hypothesis were raised. A descriptive survey research that adopted correlational design. The population of the study was all the lecturers in the six federal universities in South-South Nigeria. The sample consisted of 579 lecturers in four selected universities established before the introduction of Contributory Pension Scheme. A multistage stratified random sampling was used in selecting the sample size of the study. Two research questionnaires were used for data collection, "Contributory pension scheme implementation Questionnaire (CPSIQ)'' and "University Lecturers' Job Commitment Questionnaire (ULJCQ)". The reliability of the questionnaires were determined using Cronbach alpha statistics with values of 0.96 for CPSIQ and 0.83 for ULJCQ respectively. The data collected were collated and analyzed with Mean (x) and standard deviation to answer the research questions while the Pearson Product Moment Correlation Statistic was used to test the hypothesis at 0.05 level of significance. The study revealed that the level of contributory pension scheme implementation as perceived by lecturers in South-South Nigerian Universities was low. It also revealed that the level of Job Commitment of University Lecturers in South-South Nigerian Universities was low; and that there was a significant relationship between Contributory Pension Implementation and Lecturers' Job Commitment in South-South Nigerian Universities. The study therefore, recommended among others that government and university management should address the concerns of lecturers about the implementation of Contributory Pension Scheme in Nigerian Universities by ensuring prompt and regular remittance of deductions to lecturers' Retirement Savings Accounts (RSA) so as to create confidence.

This study investigates grade inflation in 127 language, linguistics, translation, education, and computer courses taught at some Saudi universities before, during and after the Pandemic. Grades obtained from some instructors for courses taught over 8 semesters were analyzed. It was found that between 20% 65% chose a pass/no-grade results, the rest of the students mostly earned A & B grades in Spring 2020 when instruction and assessment were held online compared to students' grade in Fall 2018, Spring 2018, Fall 2019, and after the Pandemic (in Fall 2020, Spring 2021, Fall 2021, Spring 2022). Grade inflation was the highest in computer courses followed by education courses and was the least in language, linguistics, and translation courses. Grade inflation in Spring 2020 was due to the adjustments mandated by universities to alleviate students' anxiety caused by the sudden shift to online teaching and assessment. Universities allocated 20% of the course marks to final exams, gave alternatives to a written final and to be lenient in grading. Students had the option to drop the course or have a pass with no-grade result. In Fall 2020, classes were still held online but exams were held on campus. Starting Fall 2021, both instruction and exams were held on campus. Mark distribution and exam requirements went back to normal as before the Pandemic. However, grade inflation continued in many courses even in Spring 2022. The study gives recommendations for maintaining exam reliability, validity, and fairness in emergency and normal situations to achieve the desired learning outcomes

At Saudi universities, there was a sudden shift from face-to-face instruction to distance learning and assessment in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. This study explored the status of online exams in language, linguistics, and translation courses in the first two semesters of the Pandemic (Spring 2020 and Fall 2020). Analysis of faculty surveys and students' comments on Twitter showed that the main concern of 91% of the students was final exams and passing courses with high grades. Students were worried about the negative effect of online exams on their GPA. Since the students were not familiar with online exams taken via Blackboard, they were anxious and wondered if they would do well. Some cheated on online exams as their cameras were turned off. Numerous adjustments were mandated by university administrations to alleviate students' anxiety such as allocating 20% of the course mark to the final exam, allowing more exam time, giving projects, open-book exams, term papers, reports, assignments or giving a presentation instead of the final. Some instructors gave easy questions and were lenient in grading to avoid students' complaints. They gave no essay, just objective questions. The students were given the option to drop the course, to choose a letter grade, pass/fail, i.e., no grade, or to have a course mark included in their GPA. Based on faculty surveys, this study reports challenges of online exams during the Pandemic, design and delivery of online exams, assessment forms and choices, grade inflation issues, and lessons learned and some recommendations.

This study investigates the status of grade inflation in language and translation courses in Saudi Arabia. Analysis of the pass rates and percentages of students who obtained Grades A+, A, B+ and B in 70 English language skills and translation college courses, in addition to the English course scores of students in grades 1 to 11 at a private school, showed evidence of grade inflation at the school and college levels as revealed by the high pass rates and high percentages of students obtaining Grades A+, A, B+ and B in most courses. Responses to a questionnaire-survey by a sample of schoolteachers and language and translation college instructors showed several factors contributing to grade inflation such as: school and university administrators' tendency to raise students' marks and course grades and exercising pressure over instructors to pass the students. There are misconceptions about educational quality. Administrators correlate high quality with high pass rates, regardless of the learning outcomes. Instructors worry about students and parents' complaints if some students fail. They worry about being investigated and about losing their job. Instructors would like to be liked by the students, be popular and get good ratings on the students' course evaluation forms. Instructors give easy questions and are lenient in grading. Exam results do not reflect individual differences and distinctions. The grading system produces a high pass rate as 60% of the course marks are allocated to attendance, assignments, quizzes, and class work. Exams focus on a small portion of the course/textbook material. Many course topics are not covered by the tests. Tests contain few easy questions that measure rote memorization and recall rather than higher-level thinking skills. Prior to exams, students enrolled in General English courses are given practice tests with similar questions to the final exam (in form and content). Hence, students know what to expect on the final exam. The study gives some recommendations for combating grade inflation at Saudi schools and universities.

Many high-stakes qualifications include non-exam assessments that are marked by teachers. Awarding bodies then apply a moderation process to bring the marking of these assessments to an agreed standard. Comparative Judgement (CJ) is a technique where two (or more) pieces of work are compared at a time, allowing an overall rank order of work to be generated. This study explored the practical feasibility of using CJ for moderation via an experimental moderation task requiring judgements of pairs of authentic portfolios of work. This included aspects such as whether moderators can view and navigate the portfolios sufficiently to enable them to make the comparative judgements, on what basis they make their decisions, whether moderators can be confident making CJ judgements on large pieces of candidate work (e.g., portfolios), and the time taken to moderate.

In this article, I report on examiners' views and experiences of using Pairwise Comparative Judgement (PCJ) and Rank Ordering (RO) as alternatives to traditional analytical marking for GCSE English Language essays. Fifteen GCSE English Language examiners took part in the study. After each had judged 100 pairs of essays using PCJ and eight packs of ten essays using RO, I collected data on their experiences and views of the methods through interviews and questionnaires. I analysed the data using thematic content analysis. The findings highlight that, if the methods were to be used as alternatives to marking, examiners and other stakeholders would need reassurance that the methods are fair, valid and reliable. Examiners would also need more training and support to help them to judge holistically. The lack of detail about how judgements are made using these methods is a concern worth following up and addressing before implementation.

Two of the central issues in comparative judgement (CJ), which are perhaps underexplored compared to questions of the method's reliability and technical quality, are "what processes do judges use to make their decisions" and "what features do they focus on when making their decisions?" This article discusses both, in the context of CJ for standard maintaining, by reporting the results of both a study into the processes used by judges when making CJ judgements, and the outcomes of surveys of judges who have used CJ. In the first instance, using insights from observations of judges and their being asked to think aloud while they judged, we highlight the variety of processes used when making their decisions, including comparative reference, re-marking and question-by-question evaluation. We then develop a four dimension model to explore what impacts what judges attend to, and explore through survey responses the distinctive ways in which the structure of the question paper, different elements of candidate responses, judges' own preferences and the CJ task itself affect decision-making. We conclude by discussing, in the light of these factors, whether the judgements made in CJ (or in the judgemental element of current standard maintaining procedures) are meaningfully holistic, and whether judges can properly take into account differences in difficulty between different papers.

The rationale for the use of comparative judgement (CJ) to help set grade boundaries is to provide a way of using expert judgement to identify and uphold certain minimum standards of performance rather than relying purely on statistical approaches such as comparable outcomes. This article summarises the results of recent trials of using CJ for this purpose in terms of how much difference it might have made to the positions of grade boundaries, the reported precision of estimates and the amount of time that was required from expert judges. The results show that estimated grade boundaries from a CJ approach tend to be fairly close to those that were set (using other forms of evidence) in practice. However, occasionally, CJ results displayed small but significant differences with existing boundary locations. This implies that adopting a CJ approach to awarding would have a noticeable impact on awarding decisions but not such a large one as to be implausible. This article also demonstrates that implementing CJ using simplified methods (described by Benton, Cunningham et al, 2020) achieves the same precision as alternative CJ approaches, but in less time. On average, each CJ exercise required roughly 30 judge-hours across all judges.

Providing evidence that can inform awarding is an important application of Comparative Judgement (CJ) methods in high-stakes qualifications. The process of marking scripts is not changed, but CJ methods can assist in the maintenance of standards from one series to another by informing decisions about where to place grade boundaries or cut scores. The research described in this article set out to increase understanding of the risks associated with this use of CJ. Specifically, the research explored how robust the outcomes of CJ-based awarding activities would be to mismarking in the script evidence. In this article, the author explores the extent to which the simplified pairs (SP) method would be robust to mismarking in the sample of scripts used for the comparison exercise. The research has two main conclusions: (1) The SP method appears robust to single large marking errors and to fairly large marking errors in quite high proportions of sampled scripts; and (2) The SP method is more vulnerable to a general degradation of marking quality.

U.K. higher education research routinely pinpoints the racialized nature of academic performance, but it often fails to even consider if racism contributes to such a pervasive racial or ethnic disparity. While research in the area often focuses on comparing the attainment of home white and ethnic minority students, little attention is given to the experiences of black African international students (BAIS), particularly in U.K. higher education. Using semi-structured qualitative interviews, this study documents how "race" shapes academic performance and achievement by exploring the experiences of 21 BAIS undergraduates studying in ten universities in England. Factors identified, inter alia, include racism and discrimination, and the analysis challenges the narrative of assessment as neutral and objective technology that rewards merit, and lifts the voices of BAIS which are normally silent in the literature about international student experience. 'Race' and ethnicity jeopardize perception of BAIS's academic ability and judgment of their assessed work.

Everyone uses a traditional five-point grading system to assess students' activities, however, it is not always possible to objectively evaluate students' work using this method. Therefore, the authors use the criteria-based student assessment system in our lessons. The purpose of this article was to compile a model of a system for assessing students' functional literacy based on a criteria-based approach. An experiment was conducted on 32 people and data was collected using observation and interviews. As a result of the study, it was revealed that the assessment system makes it possible to determine how successfully one or another educational material is mastered, or a certain practical skill is formed. Based on the conducted practical experiment, the effectiveness of the content-structural model of the system for assessing the functional literacy of students based on the criteria-based approach in computer science has been proved.