Accuracy in student self-assessment: directions and cautions for research

178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

A cyclical self-assessment process: towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment (2017, methodology): “Nonetheless, discrepancy of the student’s own self-assessment from other measures has been used as a valid standard by which to evaluate the construct validity of a self-assessment (Brown, Andrade, and Chen 2015).”
A Critical Review of Research on Student Self-Assessment (2019, background): “Given the evidence of the unreliability of teachers’ grades (Falchikov, 2005), the assumption that teachers’ assessments are accurate might not be well-founded (Leach, 2012; Brown et al., 2015).”
Academics’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education (2018, background): “The focus of the previous research on self and peer assessment as a learning and teaching design has been largely centred on the correlation of grading between academics and students (Boud, Lawson, and Thompson 2013; Brown, Andrade, and Chen 2015; Li et al. 2015).”
Self-assessment in the process of self-regulated learning and its relationship with academic achievement (2020, methodology): “However, using self-assessment for summative purposes has been seriously doubted due to the concerns about the accuracy of selfassessment (Brown, Andrade and Chen 2015).”