We cannot agree to disagree: ensuring consistency, transparency and fairness across bachelor thesis writing, supervision and evaluation

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Riina Koris, Rauno Pello
{"title":"We cannot agree to disagree: ensuring consistency, transparency and fairness across bachelor thesis writing, supervision and evaluation","authors":"Riina Koris, Rauno Pello","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2022.2125931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Writing, supervision and evaluation of students’ dissertations has received a fair share of attention in academic literature, with a focus on problems of marking, information processing mechanisms, worldviews and more. In most texts, problems of inconsistency, transparency and fairness are identified, leading to frustration among supervisors, assessors and students. This article shares positive experience on the creation and application of an instrument which would benefit educators and contribute practical solutions on how the issues of inconsistency, transparency and fairness within the bachelor thesis process could be tackled. Using design science research, which utilizes gained knowledge to solve problems, create change or improve existing solutions, we developed the bachelor thesis writing and assessing instrument. Following three iterations of the instrument among writers, supervisors and assessors of bachelor theses at the Estonian Business School, we conclude that the use of the instrument has greatly improved consistency, transparency and fairness of the thesis-process, thus benefitting all three parties in particular and the university in general.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2125931","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Writing, supervision and evaluation of students’ dissertations has received a fair share of attention in academic literature, with a focus on problems of marking, information processing mechanisms, worldviews and more. In most texts, problems of inconsistency, transparency and fairness are identified, leading to frustration among supervisors, assessors and students. This article shares positive experience on the creation and application of an instrument which would benefit educators and contribute practical solutions on how the issues of inconsistency, transparency and fairness within the bachelor thesis process could be tackled. Using design science research, which utilizes gained knowledge to solve problems, create change or improve existing solutions, we developed the bachelor thesis writing and assessing instrument. Following three iterations of the instrument among writers, supervisors and assessors of bachelor theses at the Estonian Business School, we conclude that the use of the instrument has greatly improved consistency, transparency and fairness of the thesis-process, thus benefitting all three parties in particular and the university in general.
我们不能同意不同意见:确保学士论文写作、监督和评估的一致性、透明度和公平性
摘要学生学位论文的撰写、监督和评估在学术文献中受到了相当多的关注,重点关注评分、信息处理机制、世界观等问题。在大多数文本中,都发现了不一致、透明和公平的问题,导致主管、评估员和学生感到沮丧。本文分享了创建和应用一种工具的积极经验,该工具将使教育工作者受益,并为如何解决学士学位论文过程中的不一致、透明和公平问题提供切实可行的解决方案。利用设计科学研究,利用所获得的知识来解决问题、创造改变或改进现有的解决方案,我们开发了学士论文写作和评估工具。在爱沙尼亚商学院学士论文的作者、导师和评审员对该工具进行了三次迭代后,我们得出结论,该工具的使用极大地提高了论文过程的一致性、透明度和公平性,从而使三方和整个大学都受益。
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
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
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