Reflective writing as summative assessment in higher education: A systematic review

Micky Ross, Julia Bohlmann, Aneta Marren
{"title":"Reflective writing as summative assessment in higher education: A systematic review","authors":"Micky Ross, Julia Bohlmann, Aneta Marren","doi":"10.56433/jpaap.v12i1.577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reflective Writing as summative assessment has gained popularity across a wide range of subjects in Higher Education. This systematic review searched three cross-disciplinary databases and analysed twenty-two primary research papers published between 2007 and 2022 to investigate (1) the reasons for setting reflective writing as summative assessment, (2) support offered to students engaging in this kind of assessment, (3) student and (4) staff experiences of reflective writing as summative assessment. Using descriptive coding methodology, the review found reflective writing to be used mainly as part of larger assessment tools in professional degree programmes to foster employability and encourage students to reflect on professional practice. Support was provided through specific frameworks, exemplars, feedback and workshops, and when used to foster the incremental development of reflective writing skills in students led to positive experiences. However, the review also highlights a number of issues relating to lacking assessment literacy among students and staff. Moreover, the personal nature of reflection and power dynamics between students and markers can lead to performative instead of genuine reflection and can call into question the validity of reflective writing as summative assessment.","PeriodicalId":498818,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice","volume":"164 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56433/jpaap.v12i1.577","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reflective Writing as summative assessment has gained popularity across a wide range of subjects in Higher Education. This systematic review searched three cross-disciplinary databases and analysed twenty-two primary research papers published between 2007 and 2022 to investigate (1) the reasons for setting reflective writing as summative assessment, (2) support offered to students engaging in this kind of assessment, (3) student and (4) staff experiences of reflective writing as summative assessment. Using descriptive coding methodology, the review found reflective writing to be used mainly as part of larger assessment tools in professional degree programmes to foster employability and encourage students to reflect on professional practice. Support was provided through specific frameworks, exemplars, feedback and workshops, and when used to foster the incremental development of reflective writing skills in students led to positive experiences. However, the review also highlights a number of issues relating to lacking assessment literacy among students and staff. Moreover, the personal nature of reflection and power dynamics between students and markers can lead to performative instead of genuine reflection and can call into question the validity of reflective writing as summative assessment.
作为高等教育终结性评价的反思性写作:系统回顾
作为终结性评价的反思性写作在高等教育的众多学科中越来越受欢迎。这篇系统性综述搜索了三个跨学科数据库,分析了2007年至2022年间发表的22篇主要研究论文,以调查:(1)将反思性写作作为终结性评价的原因;(2)为参与此类评价的学生提供的支持;(3)学生和(4)教职员工对反思性写作作为终结性评价的体验。通过使用描述性编码方法,研究发现反思性写作主要是作为专业学位课程中更大的评估工具的一部分,目的是培养学生的就业能力,鼓励学生对专业实践进行反思。通过具体的框架、范例、反馈和研讨会提供支持,当用于促进学生反思性写作技能的逐步发展时,会带来积极的体验。然而,审查也强调了一些与学生和教职员工缺乏评估素养有关的问题。此外,反思的个人性质以及学生和阅卷人之间的权力动态可能会导致表演性反思而非真正的反思,并使反思性写作作为终结性评价的有效性受到质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信