scholarly journals Widening Student Participation in Higher Education through Online Enabling Education

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 36-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahsood Shah ◽  
Elizabeth Goode ◽  
Susan West ◽  
Helene Clark
Author(s):  
Victoria Quesada ◽  
Eduardo Garcia-Jimenez ◽  
Miguel Angel Gomez-Ruiz

The participation of students in higher education assessment processes has been proven to have many benefits. However, there is a diverse range of techniques and options when implementing participative assessment, with each offering new possibilities. This chapter focuses on the topic of student participation in assessment processes, and it explores the main stages when it can be developed: participation in design, during implementation, and in grading. This chapter also considers the different modalities that can be used, especially self-assessment, peer assessment, and co-assessment and the three stages that characterise them. Finally, it analyses three experiences of student participation in higher education assessment, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. These experiences show how participative assessment can be developed in everyday classes, in groups, or individually and how participative assessment can occur in different class settings. They also demonstrate the importance of design, assessment literacy, and some difficulties that might appear during the process.


Author(s):  
Victoria Quesada ◽  
Eduardo Garcia-Jimenez ◽  
Miguel Angel Gomez-Ruiz

The participation of students in higher education assessment processes has been proven to have many benefits. However, there is a diverse range of techniques and options when implementing participative assessment, with each offering new possibilities. This chapter focuses on the topic of student participation in assessment processes, and it explores the main stages when it can be developed: participation in design, during implementation, and in grading. This chapter also considers the different modalities that can be used, especially self-assessment, peer assessment, and co-assessment and the three stages that characterise them. Finally, it analyses three experiences of student participation in higher education assessment, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. These experiences show how participative assessment can be developed in everyday classes, in groups, or individually and how participative assessment can occur in different class settings. They also demonstrate the importance of design, assessment literacy, and some difficulties that might appear during the process.


2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (03) ◽  
pp. 150-164
Author(s):  
Kristina Bartley ◽  
Jörgen Dimenäs ◽  
Hanna Hallnäs

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johnnie Aseron ◽  
Simon Wilde ◽  
Adrian Miller ◽  
Stephen Kelly

Educational processes directed at Indigenous peoples have long propagated a disparity between the educational successes of Indigenous and nonIndigenous students (May 1999), a contrast which can be acutely observed in Australia. It is not surprising, then, that the educational needs of Indigenous students have been poorly served, with the extant literature clearly declaring that there is much work to be done (Malin & Maidment, 2003). Although there have been numerous studies seeking to understand (and by extension, redress) issues pertaining to participation by minority groups in education (such as Indigenous communities), many of these undertakings fail to adequately articulate and consider the importance of cultural factors and how such realities form a unique foundation with respect to Indigenous educational policy and development options. In addressing this shortcoming, this paper explores critical, community capacity building and community empowerment strategies that may inform policies and programmes for the reduction of educational disparities, increasing Indigenous student participation in higher education and promoting Indigenousled educational initiatives. As such, this exploratory study highlights a number of emergent themes derived by community representatives, including both Indigenous Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, and nonIndigenous participants, during a series of focus group discussions.


2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 345-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayşe Kuruuzum ◽  
Ozcan Asilkan ◽  
Rabia Bato Cizel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document