The Impact of Assessment on Student Learning

By C. Rust. 2002

568 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c760ccc127bb5b6526554b6a5756fe03aef6b9fe

How researchers see this paper

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

In Education

Citations in the corpus

The impact of formative feedback on the development of academic writing (2010, background): “The quality of feedback on student writing has been investigated in a number of studies (e.g. Mutch 2003; Rust 2002; Walker 2009).”
Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’ subsequent submission of assessable work (2007, background): “…other hand, it has been suggested that when undertaking an assessment task which is similar to a previous one, students may be concerned with the process of completing the task to the point that they overlook feedback which if utilized might have resulted in a significant improvement (Rust, 2002).”
Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of marking guides, grade descriptors and annotated exemplars (2013, background): “We wish to make the assessment system not only clear but also ‘non-threatening and non-anxiety provoking’ (Rust 2002, 149).”
Assessment of Student Engagement in Higher Education: A Synthesis of Literature and Assessment Tools (2015, background): “…it becomes imperative that educators are able to gauge, monitor and assess student engagement as a component of the overall learning experience (Butler, 2011; Chapman, 2003; Fredricks & McColskey, 2013; Garrett, 2011; Kuh, 2001; Mandernach, Donnelli-Sallee, & Dailey-Hebert, 2011; Rust, 2002).”
Does the use of summative peer assessment in collaborative group work inhibit good judgement? (2018, background): “Rust (2002) found that even where there were written and verbal briefings, students still differed in their understanding of some criteria in comparison with both their peers and their tutors.”
A social constructivist assessment process model: how the research literature shows us this could be best practice (2005, result): “Peer marking of actual student work has also been shown to have similar results (Forbes & Spence, 1991; Hughes, 1995; Cohen et al., 2001; Rust, 2002).”
Transitions in higher education (2010, background): “…achieve the transition will require careful thought about the length and number of modules or courses, the quantity of material in each, delivery, quality of the learning resources, methods of assessment and so on: some encourage superficial learning, others deep learning (Gibbs, 1992; Rust, 2002).”
Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses (2006, background): “In addition, the last decade has seen a ‘paradigm shift’ (Rust, 2002) towards a more student-centred approach to education.”
First year expectations and experiences: student and teacher perspectives (2009, result): “For feedback to be efficient it should be delivered promptly after assessment (Rust 2002) rather than up to 6 weeks after submission, as was sometimes the case as found in our study (Fig.”
Peer Feedback Improves Students’ Academic Self-Concept in Higher Education (2020, background): “In summary, there is cumulative evidence that peer feedback is positively associated with academic achievement in higher education (e.g., Cartney 2010; Falchikov 2001; Nicol 2010; Rust 2002; Sluijsmans et al.”
Understanding the rules of the game: marking peer assessment as a medium for developing students' conceptions of assessment (2004, background): “In a sense, the research had inadvertently done what Rust (2002) suggests when he advocates creating ‘feedback exercises that force students to actively engage with that feedback’ (p. 153).”
Toward a better understanding of student perceptions of writing feedback: a mixed methods study (2015, background): “Familiarizing students with the feedback process and its benefits through structured class activities may be another way to help students view feedback in a positive light (Rust, 2002).”
Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education (2013, background): “In fact, inconsistent assessment practices is the most frequent low scoring area (at least in relation to other areas) in the subject reviews by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) in the United Kingdom (Rust, 2002), and in more than 40% of the institutions reviewed, feedback to students on their wor”
Assessment in higher education: drivers, barriers and directions for change in the UK (2016, background): “…dominant discourse of institutional practice The shift towards a more student-centred perspective as outlined in the learning theories literature (Rust 2002), and the increasing importance placed on a productfocused curriculum for which aligning teaching, learning and assessment (Biggs 2003) are…”
An exploration of Biggs’ constructive alignment in course design and its impact on students’ learning approaches (2013, background): “…framework for programme evaluation in higher education in different countries and regions, such as Australia (Barrie, Ginns, and Prosser 2005; Treleaven and Voola 2008), the UK (Rust 2002), Vietnam (Tran, Nguyen, and Nguyen 2010), Hong Kong (Wang et al. 2011) and the USA (Borrego and Cutler 2010).”
An assessment arms race and its fallout: high-stakes grading and the case for slow scholarship (2015, background): “The binary idea that assessment can drive a student to take either a deep approach or a surface approach to learning (Biggs 2003; Rust 2002) was illustrated in the study (Table 2).”
Exploring the Practice of Feedback to Students (2003, background): “…increasing focus on a more strategic approach to issues of assessment, with departments being encouraged to develop clear guidance on issues such as feedback to students, it may be useful to draw upon an account of practice to suggest areas that such guidance might cover (Rust, 2002; Mutch, 2002a).”