Summative Assessment in Higher Education: Practices in disarray

By P. Knight. 2002

391 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Media Technology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/06619895d89dea288fe46df269d73b256600b9f4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. David Boud
2. D. Carless
3. A. Asghar
4. Alice Lau
5. Steven Roberts
6. L. Stern
7. Amanda Solomon
8. N. Falchikov

In Media Technology

1. A. Asghar
2. Alice Lau
3. Steven Roberts
4. L. Stern
5. David Boud
6. Amanda Solomon
7. D. Carless
8. N. Falchikov

Citations in the corpus

• Reciprocal peer coaching and its use as a formative assessment strategy for first‐year students (2010, background): “These are the sorts of skills students need to assist them in making judgements on their own and on others’ work once in employment, not the skills of taking exams or writing assignments (Boud and Falchikov 2006 ), complex employability skills which Knight ( 2002 ) suggests are resistant to valid a”
• Learning‐oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications (2003, background): “Knight (2002) asserts that summative assessment is in ‘disarray’, for example, in terms of reliability or in judging the kind of complex learning to which higher education aspires.”
• ‘Formative good, summative bad?’ – A review of the dichotomy in assessment literature (2016, background): “Knight (2002) also famously described summative assessment practices as being in disarray.”
• Traditional practice for non‐traditional students? Examining the role of pedagogy in higher education retention (2011, background): “Following Knight’s ( 2002 ) assertion that students will learn better and more enthusiastically if they are given a stake in their learning, particular focus is given to the themes the respondents raised in relation to their experience of teaching provision, and how the reality matched (or otherwise”
• The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes (2013, neutral): “Although previous research demonstrates that deep learning is supported when assessment prioritises understanding over memorisation and allows sufficient time to tackle tasks in the light of clear goals and standards (Gibbs 2006; Prosser and Trigwell 1999), assessment systems in reality often fall s”
• Effective faculty feedback: The road less traveled (2006, background): “Formative feedback is intended to help improve student learning processes (Huot, 2002; Knight, 2002 ).”
• Assessment relationships in higher education: the tension of process and practice (2006, background): “Second, from conversations with students, we identified a potentially troubled mode of engagement with such processes: sufficiently troubled to resonate with claims that current assessment practices are in ‘disarray’ (Knight, 2002 ).”
• Aligning assessment with long‐term learning (2006, background): “There has also been substantial criticism of the role of summative assessment and its negative effects on student learning (Ecclestone, 1999; Knight, 2002; Knight & Yorke, 2003).”