Attali, Y. (2004). Exploring the feedback and revision features of Criterion. National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar

Attali, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater® V. 2. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 4(3).Google Scholar

Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 69–93.Google Scholar

Barry, S. (2012). A video recording and viewing protocol for student group presentations: Assisting self-assessment through a Wiki environment. Computers & Education, 59(3), 855–860.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappa, 92(1), 81–90.Google Scholar

Burrows, S., & Shortis, M. (2011). An evaluation of semi-automated, collaborative marking and feedback systems: Academic staff perspectives. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7), 1135–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burstein, J., Kukich, K., Wolff, S., Lu, C., Chodorow, M., Braden-Harder, L., & Harris, M. D. (1998, August). Automated scoring using a hybrid feature identification technique. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1 (pp. 206–210). Montreal: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar

Cann, A. (2014). Engaging students with audio feedback. Bioscience Education, 22(1), 31–41.Google Scholar

Chodorow, M., Gamon, M., & Tetreault, J. (2010). The utility of article and preposition error correction systems for English language learners: Feedback and assessment. Language Testing, 27(3), 419–436.Google Scholar

Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Word processing and writing in elementary classrooms: A critical review of related literature. Review of Educational Research, 61, 107–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coll, C., Rochera, M. J., de Gispert, I., & Barriga, F. D. (2013). Distribution of feedback among teacher and students in online collaborative learning in small groups. Digital Education Review, 23, 27–45.Google Scholar

Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., … & Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education, 58(1), 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Deneen, C. C., Brown, G. T. L., & Carless, D. (2017). Students’ conceptions of eportfolios as assessment and technology. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–10. Online prepublication, retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1281752.Google Scholar

Deneen, C. C., & Shroff, R. (2014). Understanding successes and difficulties in program-level eportfolios: A case study of two professional degree programs. Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning, 7(24), 145–160.Google Scholar

Dikli, S. (2006). An overview of automated scoring of essays. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 5(1).Google Scholar

Fink, A. (2005). Conducting research literature reviews: From the Internet to paper. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Goldberg, A., Russell, M., & Cook, A. (2003). The effect of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(1).Google Scholar

Gomez, S., Andersson, H., Park, J., Maw, S., Crook, A., & Orsmond, P. (2013). A digital ecosystems model of assessment feedback on student learning. Higher Education Studies, 3(2), 41–51.Google Scholar

Harrison, C. J., Könings, K. D., Molyneux, A., Schuwirth, L. W., Wass, V., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2013). Web‐based feedback after summative assessment: How do students engage? Medical Education, 47(7), 734–744.Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.Google Scholar

Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2014). Technology enhanced feedback on assessment. In Australian Computers in Education Conference, Adelaide, SA, September 30–October 3, 2014 (pp. 1–11). Retrieved from http://acec2014.acce.edu.au/session/technology- enhanced- feedback-assessment.Google Scholar

Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66.Google Scholar

Hennessy, C., & Forrester, G. (2014). Developing a framework for effective audio feedback: A case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 777–789.Google Scholar

Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 117–127.Google Scholar

Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133–152.Google Scholar

Huang, H. T. D., & Hung, S. T. A. (2013). Exploring the utility of a video‐based online EFL discussion forum. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), E90–E94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Irwin, B., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Parkin, H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2013). Engaging students with feedback through adaptive release. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(1), 51–61.Google Scholar

Jackson, M., & Marks, L. (2016). Improving the effectiveness of feedback by use of assessed reflections and withholding of grades. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(4), 532–547.Google Scholar

Jordan, S. (2012). Student engagement with assessment and feedback: Some lessons from short-answer free-text e-assessment questions. Computers & Education, 58(2), 818–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jordan, S. (2013). E-assessment: Past, present and future. New Directions, 9(1), 87–106.Google Scholar

Jordan, S., & Mitchell, T. (2009). e‐Assessment for learning? The potential of short answer free text questions with tailored feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 371–385.Google Scholar

Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students’ art design performance using handheld devices. Computers & Education, 85, 149–159.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2008). Response to assessment feedback: The effects of grades, praise, and source of information. ETS Research Report Series, 2008(1).Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2009). Effects of differential feedback on students’ examination performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(4), 319.Google Scholar

Marriott, P., & Teoh, L. K. (2012). Using screencasts to enhance assessment feedback: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Accounting Education, 21(6), 583–598.Google Scholar

McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153–169.Google Scholar

Narciss, S., Sosnovsky, S., Schnaubert, L., Andrès, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., & Melis, E. (2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education, 71, 56–76.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. (2007). E-assessment by design: Using multiple‐choice tests to good effect. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 53–64.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. J., & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment in terms of the seven principles of good feedback practice. In Bryan, C. and Clegg, K. (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 64–77). London: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar

Nino, M., & Evans, M. A. (2015). Fostering 21st-century skills in constructivist engineering classrooms with digital game-based learning. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 10(3), 143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Parkin, H. J., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2012). A role for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(8), 963–973.Google Scholar

Phillips, M., Henderson, M., & Ryan, T. (2016). Multimodal feedback is not always clearer, more useful or satisfying. In Barker, S., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Colvin, C. (Eds.), Show me the learning: Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 Adelaide (pp. 512–522).Google Scholar

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.Google Scholar

Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Shermis, M. D., Burstein, J., & Bursky, S. A. (2013). Introduction to automated essay evaluation. In Shermis, M. D., Burstein, J., & Bursky, S. A. (Eds.), Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Shroff, R. H., & Deneen, C. C. (2011). Assessing online textual feedback to support student intrinsic motivation using a collaborative text-based dialogue system: A qualitative study. International Journal on E-Learning, 10(1), 87–104.Google Scholar

Shute, V., & Towle, B. (2003). Adaptive e-learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(2), 105–114.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J. (2011). Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Computer Games and Instruction, 55(2), 503–524.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J., & Ke, F. (2012). Games, learning, and assessment. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 43–58). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Timmers, C. F., Braber-Van Den Broek, J., & Van Den Berg, S. M. (2013). Motivational beliefs, student effort, and feedback behaviour in computer-based formative assessment. Computers & Education, 60(1), 25–31.Google Scholar

Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts and tutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects on students’ self-regulated learning competence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.Google Scholar

Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 157–180.Google Scholar

West, J., & Turner, W. (2016). Enhancing the assessment experience: Improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(4), 400–410.Google Scholar

Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2015). Effective feedback design using free technologies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 52(3), 408–434.Google Scholar

All, A., Castellar, E. P. N., & Van Looy, J. (2016). Assessing the effectiveness of digital game-based learning: Best practices. Computers & Education, 92 –93, 90–103.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. (1996). ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition. American Psychologist, 51(4), 355–365.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1974). A propositional theory of recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 2(3), 406–412.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., Corbett, A. T., & Lewis, M. W. (1990). Cognitive modeling and intelligent tutoring. Artificial intelligence, 42(1), 7–49.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned.  Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 167–207.Google Scholar

Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., & Winters, F. I. (2011). Adaptive content and process scaffolding: A key to facilitating students’ self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Psychological Testing and Assessment Modeling, 53(1), 106–140.Google Scholar

Baker, R. S., Clarke-Midura, J., & Ocumpaugh, J. (2016). Towards general models of effective science inquiry in virtual performance assessments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32, 267–280.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 5.Google Scholar

Buelow, M. T., Okdie, B. M., & Cooper, A. B. (2015). The influence of video games on executive functions in college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 228–234.Google Scholar

Chen, C. M., & Wang, H. P. (2011). Using emotion recognition technology to assess the effects of different multimedia materials on learning emotion and performance. Library & Information Science Research, 33(3), 244–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbett, A. T., Anderson, J. R., & O’Brien, A. T. (1995). Student modeling in the ACT programming tutor. Cognitively Diagnostic Assessment, 19–41.Google Scholar

Csapó, B., Lörincz, A., & Molnár, G. (2012). Innovative assessment technologies in educational games designed for young students. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 235–254). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

De Lisi, R., & Wolford, J. L. (2002). Improving children’s mental rotation accuracy with computer game playing. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(3), 272–282.Google Scholar

de Klerk, S., Veldkamp, B. P., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Psychometric analysis of the performance data of simulation-based assessment: A systematic review and a Bayesian network example. Computers & Education, 85, 23–34.Google Scholar

de Klerk, S., Veldkamp, B. P., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2016). A methodology for applying students’ interactive task performance scores from a multimedia-based performance assessment in Bayesian network. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 264–279.Google Scholar

DeLoache, J. S. (1987). Rapid change in the symbolic functioning of very young children. Science, 238, 1556–1557.Google Scholar

Domagk, S., Schwartz, R. N., & Plass, J. L. (2010). Interactivity in multimedia learning: An integrated model. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 1024–1033.Google Scholar

Fraser, K., Ma, I., Teteris, E., Baxter, H., Wright, B., & McLaughlin, K. (2012). Emotion, cognitive load and learning outcomes during simulation training. Medical Education, 46(11), 1055–1062.Google Scholar

Erez, A., & Isen, A. M. (2002). The influence of positive affect on the components of expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1055.Google Scholar

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Gee, J. P., & Shaffer, D. W. (2010). Looking where the light is bad: Video games and the future of assessment. Phi Delta Kappa International EDge, 6(1), 3–19.Google Scholar

Hao, J., Smith, L., Mislevy, R., von Davier, A., & Bauer, M. (2016). Taming log files from game/simulation‐based assessments: Data models and data analysis tools. Research Report ETS RR-16-10. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ets2.12096/epdf.Google Scholar

Homer, B. D., Plass, J. L., Raffaele, C., Ober, T. M., & Ali, A. (2018). Improving high school students’ executive functions through digital game play. Computers & Education, 117, 50–58.Google Scholar

Hoffman, B., & Nadelson, L. (2010). Motivational engagement and video gaming: A mixed methods study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 245–270.Google Scholar

Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004, July). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI (vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–5). San Jose, CA: AAAI Press.Google Scholar

Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem‐based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394–404.Google Scholar

Kim, B. (2015). Game mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics. Library Technology Reports, 51(2), 17.Google Scholar

Kim, Y. J., & Shute, V. J. (2015). The interplay of game elements with psychometric qualities, learning, and enjoyment in game-based assessment. Computers & Education, 87, 340–356.Google Scholar

Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. In Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.Google Scholar

Kyle, F., Kujala, J., Richardson, U., Lyytinen, H., & Goswami, U. (2013). Assessing the effectiveness of two theoretically motivated computer‐assisted reading interventions in the United Kingdom: GG Rime and GG Phoneme. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 61–76.Google Scholar

Leighton, J. P., & Chu, M. W. (2016). First among equals: Hybridization of cognitive diagnostic assessment and evidence-centered game design. International Journal of Testing, 16(2), 164–180.Google Scholar

Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125–139.Google Scholar

Mayer, R. E. (2015). On the need for research evidence to guide the design of computer games for learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 349–353.Google Scholar

McGrew, K. S., & Woodcock, R. W. (2001). Technical manual: Woodcock–Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar

Meyer, B., & Sørensen, B. H. (2009). Designing serious games for computer assisted language learning: A framework for development and analysis. In Kankaanranta, M. & Neittaanmäki, P. (Eds.), Design and use of serious games (pp. 69–82). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R. J., Behrens, J. T., Dicerbo, K. E., Frezzo, D. C., & West, P. (2012). Three things game designers need to know about assessment. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 59–81). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of evidence‐centered design for educational testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 6–20.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R. J., Orange, A., Bauer, M. I., von Davier, A., Hao, J., Corrigan, S., … & John, M. (2014). Psychometric considerations in game-based assessment. White paper. Retrieved from www.ets.org/research/policy_research_reports/publications/white_paper/2014/jrrx.Google Scholar

Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., & Almond, R. G. (2002). Design and analysis in task-based language assessment. Language Testing, 19(4), 477–496.Google Scholar

Novak, E., & Johnson, T. E. (2012). Assessment of student’s emotions in game-based learning. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 379–399). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Parong, J., Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., MacNamara, A., Homer, B. D., & Plass, J. L. (2017). Learning executive function skills by playing focused video games. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 141–151.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Picard, R. W. (1997). Affective computing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 25.Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50, 258–283.Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., Kinzer, C. K., Chang, Y. K., Frye, J., Kaczetow, W., … & Perlin, K. (2013). Metrics in simulations and games for learning. In Seif El-Nasr, M., Drachen, A., & Canossa, A. (Eds.), Game analytics (pp. 697–729). London: Springer.Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., Kinzer, C. K., Frye, J., & Perlin, K. (2011). Learning mechanics and assessment mechanics for games for learning. G4LI White Paper, 1.Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., & Kaplan, U. (2016). Emotional design in digital media for learning. In Emotions, technology, design, and learning (pp. 131–161).Google Scholar

Plass, J. L., O’Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050–1066.Google Scholar

Raven, J. (2000). The Raven’s progressive matrices: Change and stability over culture and time. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 1–48.Google Scholar

Raven, J. C. (1941). Standardization of progressive matrices, 1938. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 19(1), 137–150.Google Scholar

Ravitch, D. (2016). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. Basic Books.Google Scholar

Reese, D. D., Seward, R. J., Tabachnick, B. G., Hitt, B. A., Harrison, A., & Mcfarland, L. (2012). Timed report measures learning: Game-based embedded assessment. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 145–172). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Rizzo, A. A., Buckwalter, J. G., Bowerly, T., Van Der Zaag, C., Humphrey, L., Neumann, U., … & Sisemore, D. (2000). The virtual classroom: A virtual reality environment for the assessment and rehabilitation of attention deficits. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(3), 483–499.Google Scholar

Servan-Schreiber, E. (1991). The competitive chunking theory: Models of perception, learning, and memory. Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar

Shute, V., & Sun, C. (in press). Game-based assessment: What it is and does it work? In Plass, J., Mayer, R., & Homer, B. D. (Eds.), Handbook of game-based learning. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Shute, V., & Ventura, M. (2013). Stealth assessment: Measuring and supporting learning in video games. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J. (2011). Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Computer Games and Instruction, 55(2), 503–524.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J., Moore, G. R., & Wang, L. (2015). Measuring problem solving skills in Plants vs. Zombies 2. International Educational Data Mining Society: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 428–431). Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J., Ventura, M., & Ke, F. (2015). The power of play: The effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Computers & Education, 80, 58–67.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J., Ventura, M., & Kim, Y. J. (2013). Assessment and learning of qualitative physics in Newton’s Playground.  Journal of Educational Research, 106(6), 423–430.Google Scholar

Shute, V. J., Wang, L., Greiff, S., Zhao, W., & Moore, G. (2016). Measuring problem solving skills via stealth assessment in an engaging video game. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 106–117.Google Scholar

Thelwall, M. (2000). Computer-based assessment: A versatile educational tool. Computers & Education, 34(1), 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

US Department of Education (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf.Google Scholar

Wilson, A. J., Revkin, S. K., Cohen, D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2006). An open trial assessment of “The Number Race,” an adaptive computer game for remediation of dyscalculia. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 2(1), 20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wüstenberg, S., Greiff, S., & Funke, J. (2012). Complex problem solving more than reasoning? Intelligence, 40, 1–14.Google Scholar

Admiraal, W., Huisman, B., & Pilli, O. (2015). Assessment in massive open online courses. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13, 207–216.Google Scholar

Alaoutinen, S. (2012). Evaluating the effect of learning style and student background on self-assessment accuracy. Computer Science Education, 22, 175–198.Google Scholar

Al-Rawahi, N. M., & Al-Balushi, S. M. (2015). The effect of reflective science journal writing on students’ self-regulated learning strategies. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10, 367–379.Google Scholar

Andrade, H. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In Andrade, H. & Cizek, G. (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90–105). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Andrade, H. (2013). Classroom assessment in the context of learning theory and research. In McMillan, J. H. (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 17–34). New York: Sage.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., & Boulay, B. (2003). The role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. Journal of Educational Research, 97, 21–34.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., & Brookhart, S. M. (2016). The role of classroom assessment in supporting self-regulated learning (pp. 293–309). In Laveault, D. & Allal, L. (Eds.), Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Andrade, H. L., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Student self-assessment in the classroom. In Brown, G. T. L. & Harris, L. R. (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 319–334). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 159–181.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., Du, Y., & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and middle school students’ writing. Assessment in Education, 17, 199–214.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 27(2), 3–13.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 12–19.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Research, 102, 287–302.Google Scholar

Baars, M., Vink, S., van Gog, T., de Bruin, A., & Paas, F. (2014). Effects of training self-assessment and using assessment standards on retrospective and prospective monitoring of problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 33, 92–107.Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar

Barney, S., Khurum, M., Petersen, K., Unterkalmsteiner, M., & Jabangwe, R. (2012). Improving students with rubric-based self-assessment and oral feedback. IEEE Transactions on Education, 55, 319–325.Google Scholar

Baxter, P., & Norman, G. (2011). Self-assessment or self deception? A lack of association between nursing students’ self-assessment and performance. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67, 2406–2413.Google Scholar

Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 18, 5–25.Google Scholar

Birjandi, P., & Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2012). The role of self-, peer and teacher assessment in promoting Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 513–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–144, 146–148.Google Scholar

Blanch-Hartigan, D. (2011). Medical students’ self-assessment of performance: Results from three meta-analyses. Patient Education and Counseling, 84, 3–9.Google Scholar

Bol, L., Hacker, D. J., Walck, C. C., & Nunnery, J. A. (2012). The effects of individual or group guidelines on the calibration accuracy and achievement of high school biology students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 280–287.Google Scholar

Boud, D. (1995a). Implementing student self-assessment (2nd edn.). Australian Capital Territory: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.Google Scholar

Boud, D. (1995b). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar

Boud, D. (1999). Avoiding the traps: Seeking good practice in the use of self-assessment and reflection in professional courses. Social Work Education, 18, 121–132.Google Scholar

Boud, D., & Brew, A. (1995). Developing a typology for learner self-assessment practices. Research and Development in Higher Education, 18, 130–135.Google Scholar

Bourke, R. (2014). Self-assessment in professional programmes within tertiary institutions. Teaching in Higher Education, 19, 908–918.Google Scholar

Bourke, R. (2016). Liberating the learner through self-assessment. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46, 97–111.Google Scholar

Brown, G., Andrade, H., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: Directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education, 22(4), 444–457.Google Scholar

Brown, G. T., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In McMillan, J. H. (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367–393). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2014). The future of self-assessment in classroom practice: Reframing self-assessment as a core competency. Frontline Learning Research, 3, 22–30.Google Scholar

Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281.Google Scholar

Chang, C.-C., Liang, C., & Chen, Y.-H. (2013). Is learner self-assessment reliable and valid in a web-based portfolio environment for high school students? Computers & Education, 60, 325–334.Google Scholar

Chang, C.-C., Tseng, K.-H., & Lou, S.-J. (2012). A comparative analysis of the consistency and difference among teacher-assessment, student self-assessment and peer-assessment in a web-based portfolio assessment environment for high school students. Computers & Education, 58, 303–320.Google Scholar

Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438–481.Google Scholar

de Bruin, A. B. H., & van Gog, T. (2012). Improving self-monitoring and self-regulation: From cognitive psychology to the classroom, Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 245–252.Google Scholar

De Grez, L., Valcke, M., & Roozen, I. (2012). How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? Active Learning in Higher Education, 13, 129–142.Google Scholar

Draper, S. W. (2009). What are learners actually regulating when given feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 306–315.Google Scholar

Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Epstein, R. M., Siegel, D. J., & Silberman, J. (2008). Self-monitoring in clinical practice: A challenge for medical educators. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 5–13.Google Scholar

Eva, K. W., & Regehr, G. (2008). “I’ll never play professional football” and other fallacies of self-assessment. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 14–19.Google Scholar

Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar

Fastre, G. M. J., van der Klink, M. R., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2012). Drawing students’ attention to relevant assessment criteria: Effects on self-assessment skills and performance. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 64, 185–198.Google Scholar

Fastre, G. M. J., van der Klink, M. R., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2010). The effects of performance-based assessment criteria on student performance and self-assessment skills. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15, 517–532.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, B., & Schulz, H. (2016, April). Teaching young students to self-assess critically. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington DC.Google Scholar

Franken, A. S. (1992). I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me! Daily affirmations by Stuart Smalley. New York: Dell.Google Scholar

Glaser, C., & Brunstein, J. C. (2007). Improving fourth-grade students’ composition skills: Effects of strategy instruction and self-regulation procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 297–310.Google Scholar

Gonida, E. N., & Leondari, A. (2011). Patterns of motivation among adolescents with biased and accurate self-efficacy beliefs. International Journal of Educational Research, 50, 209–220.Google Scholar

Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160–170.Google Scholar

Harding, J. L., & Hbaci, I. (2015). Evaluating pre-service teachers’ math teaching experience from different perspectives. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(6), 382–389.Google Scholar

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., & Friedlander, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar

Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101–111.Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.Google Scholar

Hawe, E., & Parr, J. (2014). Assessment for learning in the writing classroom: An incomplete realization. Curriculum Journal, 25, 210–237.Google Scholar

Hawkins, S. C., Osborne, A., Schofield, S. J., Pournaras, D. J., & Chester, J. F. (2012). Improving the accuracy of self-assessment of practical clinical skills using video feedback: The importance of including benchmarks. Medical Teacher, 34, 279–284.Google Scholar

Huang, Y., & Gui, M. (2015). Articulating teachers’ expectations afore: Impact of rubrics on Chinese EFL learners’ self-assessment and speaking ability. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(3), 126–132.Google Scholar

Kaderavek, J. N., Gillam, R. B., Ukrainetz, T. A., Justice, L. M., & Eisenberg, S. N. (2004). School-age children’s self-assessment of oral narrative production. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26, 37–48.Google Scholar

Karnilowicz, W. (2012). A comparison of self-assessment and tutor assessment of undergraduate psychology students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40, 591–604.Google Scholar

Kingston, N. M., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37.Google Scholar

Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Enhancing self-regulation of practice: The influence of graphing and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 201–212.Google Scholar

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.Google Scholar

Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Collaboration scripts: A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 159–185.Google Scholar

Kolovelonis, A., Goudas, M., & Dermitzaki, I. (2012). Students’ performance calibration in a basketball dribbling task in elementary physical education. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(3), 507–517.Google Scholar

Koriat, A. (2012). The relationships between monitoring, regulation and performance. Learning and Instruction, 22, 296–298.Google Scholar

Kostons, D., van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2012). Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning. Learning and Instruction, 22, 121–132.Google Scholar

Labuhn, A. S., Zimmerman, B. J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students’ self-regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative standards Metacognition and Learning, 5, 173–194.Google Scholar

Leach, L. (2012). Optional self-assessment: Some tensions and dilemmas. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 137–147.Google Scholar

Lew, M. D. N., Alwis, W. A. M., & Schmidt, H. G. (2010). Accuracy of students’ self-assessment and their beliefs about its utility. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 135–156.Google Scholar

Lin-Siegler, X., Shaenfield, D., & Elder, A. D. (2015). Contrasting case instruction can improve self-assessment of writing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 517–537.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., & Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In Brown, G. T. L. & Harris, L. R. (Eds.), The handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169–185). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lopez, R., & Kossack, S. (2007). Effects of recurring use of self-assessment in university courses. International Journal of Learning, 14, 203–216.Google Scholar

Lopez-Pastor, V. M., Fernandez-Balboa, J.-M., Santos Pastor, M. L., & Aranda, A. F. (2012). Students’ self-grading, professor’s grading and negotiated final grading at three university programmes: Analysis of reliability and grade difference ranges and tendencies. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 453–464.Google Scholar

Lui, A. (2017). Validity of the Responses to Feedback Survey: Operationalizing and measuring students’ cognitive and affective responses to teachers’ feedback. Doctoral dissertation, University at Albany, State University of New York.Google Scholar

Memis, E. K., & Seven, S. (2015). Effects of an SWH approach and self-evaluation on sixth grade students’ learning and retention of an electricity unit. International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(3), 32–49.Google Scholar

Meusen-Beekman, K. D., Joosten-ten Brinke, D., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2016). Effects of formative assessments to develop self-regulation among sixth grade students: Results from a randomized controlled intervention. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 126–136.Google Scholar

Miller, T. M., & Geraci, L. (2011). Training metacognition in the classroom: The influence of incentives and feedback on exam predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 6, 303–314.Google Scholar

Murakami, C., Valvona, C., & Broudy, D. (2012). Turning apathy into activeness in oral communication classes: Regular self- and peer-assessment in a TBLT programme. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 40, 407–420.Google Scholar

Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199–218.Google Scholar

Nielsen, K. (2014), Self-assessment methods in writing instruction: A conceptual framework, successful practices and essential strategies. Journal of Research in Reading, 37, 1–16.Google Scholar

Nowell, C., & Alston, R. M. (2007). I thought I got an A! Overconfidence across the economics curriculum. Journal of Economic Education, 38(2), 131–142.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations. When it happens, how is it acquired and what to do to develop it in our students. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11, 551–576.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Alonso-Tapia, J., & Huertas, J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 806–813.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Alonso-Tapia, J., & Huertas, J. A. (2014). Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts: Effects on first year university students’ self-regulation and performance. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 3(7), 149–183.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Alonso-Tapia, J., & Reche, E. (2013). Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts effect on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy in pre-service teachers. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 125–132.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Brown, G. L., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 803–830.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74–98.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Strijbos, J. W. (2016). Scaffolding self-regulated learning through self-assessment and peer assessment: Guidelines for classroom implementation. In Laveault, D. & Allal, L. (Eds.), Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation (pp. 311–326). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21, 133–148.Google Scholar

Punhagui, G. C., & de Souza, N. A. (2013). Self-regulation in the learning process: Actions through self-assessment activities with Brazilian students. International Education Studies, 6(10), 47–62.Google Scholar

Ross, J. A., Rolheiser, C., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (1998, April). Impact of self-evaluation training on mathematics achievement in a cooperative learning environment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar

Ross, J. A., & Starling, M. (2008). Self‐assessment in a technology‐supported environment: The case of grade 9 geography. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(2), 183–199.Google Scholar

Sargeant, J. (2008). Toward a common understanding of self-assessment. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 1–4.Google Scholar

Sargeant, J., Mann, K., van der Vleuten, C., & Metsemakers, J. (2008). “Directed" self-assessment: Practice and feedback within a social context. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 47–54.Google Scholar

Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.Google Scholar

Silver, I., Campbell, C., Marlow, B., & Sargeant, J. (2008). Self-assessment and continuing professional development: The Canadian perspective. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28, 25–31.Google Scholar

Siow, L.-F. (2015). Students’ perceptions on self- and peer-assessment in enhancing learning experience. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2), 21–35.Google Scholar

Tan, K. (2004). Does student self-assessment empower or discipline students? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 651–662.Google Scholar

Tan, K. (2009). Meanings and practices of power in academics’ conceptions of student self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 361–373.Google Scholar

Taras, M. (2008). Issues of power and equity in two models of self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 81–92.Google Scholar

Tejeiro, R. A., Gomez-Vallecillo, J. L., Romero, A. F., Pelegrina, M., Wallace, A., & Emberley, E. (2012). Summative self-assessment in higher education: Implications of its counting towards the final mark. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10, 789–812.Google Scholar

van Helvoort, A. A. J. (2012). How adult students in information studies use a scoring rubric for the development of their information literacy skills. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38, 165–171.Google Scholar

van Loon, M. H., de Bruin, A. B. H., van Gog, T., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Dunlosky, J. (2014). Can students evaluate their understanding of cause-and-effect relations? The effects of diagram completion on monitoring accuracy. Acta Psychologica, 151, 143–154.Google Scholar

Wang, W. (2017). Using rubrics in student self-assessment: Student perceptions in the English as a foreign language writing context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1280–1292.Google Scholar

Wollenschläger, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Möller, J., & Harms, U. (2016). What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44–45, 1–11.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-regulated learning and performance: An introduction and overview. In Zimmerman, B. J & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Alqassab, M. (2016). Peer feedback provision and mathematical proofs: Role of domain knowledge, beliefs, perceptions, epistemic emotions, and peer feedback content. Doctoral thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians University.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7–73.Google Scholar

Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In McMillan, J. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367–393). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar

Chesney, S., & Marcangelo, C. (2010). “There was a lot of learning going on”: Using a digital medium to support learning in a professional course for new HE lecturers. Computers & Education, 54, 701–708.Google Scholar

Cho, K., Cho, M., & Hacker, D. J. (2010). Self-monitoring support for learning to write. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(2), 101–113.Google Scholar

Cho, K., Chung, T. R., King, W. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Peer-based computer-supported knowledge refinement: An empirical investigation. Communications of the ACM, 51(3), 83–88.Google Scholar

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. A. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328–338.Google Scholar

Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing. Written Communication, 23, 260–294.Google Scholar

Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer- and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24, 331–350.Google Scholar

Falchikov, N. (2007). The place of peers in learning and assessment. In Boud, D. & Falchikov, N. (Eds.), Rethinking assessment for higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 128–143). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59, 395–430.Google Scholar

Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70, 287–322.Google Scholar

Gan, J. S. M. (2011). The effects of prompts and explicit coaching on peer feedback quality. Doctoral thesis, University of Auckland.Google Scholar

Gan, M. J. S., & Hattie, J. (2014). Prompting secondary students’ use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels during an investigative task. Instructional Science, 42, 861–878.Google Scholar

Gan, M. J. S., & Hill, M. (2014). Using a dialogical approach to examine peer feedback during chemistry investigative task discussion. Research in Science Education, 44, 727–749.Google Scholar

Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51, 21–38.Google Scholar

Gielen, M. (2016). The impact of structuring peer feedback in a wiki-based CSCL environment on performance and feedback content. Dissertation, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University.Google Scholar

Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2012). Peer assessment in a wiki: Product improvement, students’ learning and perception regarding peer feedback. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 585–594.Google Scholar

Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015a). Structuring the peer assessment process: A multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31, 435–449.Google Scholar

Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015b). Structuring peer assessment: Comparing the impact of the degree of structure on peer feedback content. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 315–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015c). Scripting the role of assessor and assessee in peer assessment in a wiki environment: Impact on peer feedback quality and product improvement. Computers & Education, 88, 370–386.Google Scholar

Gielen, S. (2007). Peer assessment as a tool for learning. Doctoral thesis, University of Leuven.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Dierick, S. (2003). Evaluating the consequential validity of new modes of assessment: The influence of assessment on learning, including pre-, post-, and true assessment effects. In Segers, M., Dochy, F., & Cascallar, E. (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 37–54). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Onghena, P. (2011). An inventory of peer assessment diversity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 137–155.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Janssens, S., Schelfhout, W., & Decuyper, S. (2007). A complementary role for peer feedback and staff feedback in powerful learning environments. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Struyven, K., & Smeets, S. (2011). Goals of peer assessment and their associated quality concepts. Studies in Higher Education, 36, 719–735.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 304–315.Google Scholar

Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). Peer feedback as a substitute for teacher feedback. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar

Gikandi, J. W., & Morrow, D. (2016). Designing and implementing peer formative feedback within online learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In Mayer, R. E. & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.Google Scholar

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.Google Scholar

Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 525–536.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., & Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In Brown, G. T. L. & Harris, L. R. (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169–185). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Student attitudes toward networked peer assessment: Case studies of undergraduate students and senior high school students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29, 241–254.Google Scholar

Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11, 279–290.Google Scholar

McCarthy, J. M. (2016). Global learning partnerships in the café: Peer feedback as a formative assessment tool for animation students. Interactive Learning Environments, 24, 1298–1318.Google Scholar

Messick, S. (1998). Test validity: A matter of consequence. Social Indicators Research, 45, 35–44.Google Scholar

Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. In Niegemann, H. M., Brünken, R., & Leutner, D. (Eds.), Instructional design for multimedia learning. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop of SIG 6 Instructional Design of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) (pp. 181–195). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar

Panadero, E. (2016). Is it safe? Social, interpersonal, and human effects of peer assessment: A review and future directions. In Brown, G. T. L. & Harris, L. R. (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 247–266). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., & Brown, G. T. L. (2017). Teachers’ reasons for using peer assessment: Positive experience predicts use. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32, 133–156.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Brown, G. T. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 803–830.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74–98.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Strijbos, J. W. (2016). Scaffolding self-regulated learning through self-assessment and peer assessment: Guidelines for classroom implementation. In Laveault, D. & Allal, L. (Eds.), Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation (pp. 311–326). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on construct validity of peer assessment, perceived fairness and comfort, and performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 195–203.Google Scholar

Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C. A., & Schunn, C. D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41, 381–405.Google Scholar

Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43, 591–614.Google Scholar

Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265–289.Google Scholar

Rotsaert, T. (2017). The social nature of peer assessment in secondary and higher education: Examining students’ perceptions on interpersonal processes and peer feedback quality in anonymous face-to-face settings using mobile response technology. Doctoral thesis, Ghent University.Google Scholar

Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., Estrada, E., & Schellens, T. (2017). How do students perceive the educational value of peer assessment in relation to its social nature? A survey study in Flanders. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 29–40.Google Scholar

Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., Schellens, T., & Raes, A. (2018a). “Now you know what you?re doing right and wrong!” Peer feedback quality in synchronous peer assessment in secondary education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(2), 255–275. doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0329-xGoogle Scholar

Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., & Schellens, T. (2018b). Peer assessment use, its social nature challenges and perceived educational value: a teachers’ survey study. Accepted for publication in Studies in Educational Evaluation.Google Scholar

Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., & Schellens, T. (2018c). Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: Its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33, 75–99. doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0339-8Google Scholar

Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189.Google Scholar

Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 443–454.Google Scholar

Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Martens, R. L. (2004). Training teachers in peer-assessment skills: Effects on performance and perceptions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41, 59–78.Google Scholar

Strijbos, J. W., & Müller, A. (2014). Personale faktoren im feedbackprozess. In Ditton, H. & Müller, A. (Eds.), Feedback und rückmeldungen: Theoretische grundlagen, empirische befunde, praktische anwendungsfelder [Feedback and evaluation: Theoretical foundations, empirical findings, practical implementation] (pp. 87–134). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar

Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20, 291–303.Google Scholar

Strijbos, J. W., Ochoa, T. A., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Segers, M., & Tillema, H. H. (2009). Fostering interactivity through formative peer assessment in (web-based) collaborative learning environments. In Mourlas, C., Tsianos, N., & Germanakos, P. (Eds.), Cognitive and emotional processes in web-based education: Integrating human factors and personalization (pp. 375–395). Hersey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar

Strijbos, J. W., & Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 265–269.Google Scholar

Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249–276.Google Scholar

van Gennip, N. (2012). Assessing together: Peer assessment from an interpersonal perspective. Doctoral thesis, Universiteit Leiden.Google Scholar

van Gennip, N., Segers, M., & Tillema, H. H. (2009). Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: The influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review, 4, 41–54.Google Scholar

van Gennip, N., Segers, M., & Tillema, H. H. (2010). Peer assessment as a collaborative learning activity: The role of interpersonal variables and conceptions. Learning and Instruction, 20, 280–290.Google Scholar

van Zundert, M. (2012). Conditions of peer assessment for complex learning. Doctoral thesis, Maastrich University.Google Scholar

van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Könings, K. D., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2012). The differential effects of task complexity on domain-specific and peer assessment skills. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 32, 127–145.Google Scholar

van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20, 270–279.Google Scholar

Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3–14.Google Scholar

Yan, Z., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). A cyclical self-assessment process: Towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–16.Google Scholar

Ainsworth, L., & Viegut, D. (2006). Common formative assessments: How to connect standards-based instruction and assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar

Armstrong, T. (2000). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (2nd edn.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–144.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1964). Stability and change in human characteristics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment (UCLA-CSIEP), 1(2), 1–12.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1971a). Individual differences in school achievement: A vanishing point? Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan International.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1971b). Mastery learning. In Block, J. H. (Ed.), Mastery learning: Theory and practice (pp. 47–63). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1977). Favorable learning conditions for all. Teacher, 95(3), 22–28.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1978). New views of the learner for instruction and curriculum. Educational Leadership, 35, 563–576.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S. (1981). All our children learning: A primer for parents, teachers, and other educators. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 1: The cognitive domain. New York: McKay.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Bloom, B. S., Madaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T. (1981). Evaluation to improve learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Dollard, J., & Miller, N. E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Duffy, G. G., & Kear, K. (2007). Compliance or adaptation: What is the real message about research-based practices? Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 579–581.Google Scholar

Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Given, B. K. (2000). Learning styles (rev. edn.). Oceanside, CA: Learning Forum Publications.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (1997). Implementing mastery learning (2nd edn.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (1998). Making time to train your staff. School Administrator, 55(7), 35–37.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2001). Mastery learning. In Smelser, N. J. & Baltes, P. B. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of social and behavioral sciences (pp. 9372–9377). Oxford: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 6–11.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2007a). Formative classroom assessment and Benjamin S. Bloom: Theory, research, and practice. In McMillan, J. H. (Ed.), Formative classroom assessment: Theory into practice (pp. 63–78). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2007b). Closing achievement gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s “Learning for Mastery.” Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, 8–31.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (2008). The rest of the story. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 28–35.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R. (Ed.) (2012). Benjamin S. Bloom: Portraits of an Educator (2nd edn.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R., & DeWitt, P. (2017, June 1). Why do we recycle and sometimes misuse educational words? Education Week Blog. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/finding_common_ground/2017/06/educational_words_wh_they_are_recycled_and_sometimes_misused.html.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R., & McTighe, J. (2016). Pre-assessment: Promises and cautions. Educational Leadership, 73(7), 38–43.Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.Google Scholar

Hockett, J. A., & Doubet, K. J. (2014). Turning on the lights: What pre-assessments can do. Educational Leadership, 71(4), 50–54.Google Scholar

Jenkins, J. K., & Sekayi, D. (2016, Winter). Teacher perceptions of response to intervention implementation in light of IDEA goals. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 66–86.Google Scholar

Kastner, J., & Gottlieb, J. (1991). Classification of children in special education: Importance of pre-assessment information. Psychology in the Schools, 28, 19–27.Google Scholar

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook 2: The affective domain. New York: McKay.Google Scholar

Lawrence, G. D. (1997). Looking at type and learning styles. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.Google Scholar

Lazarowitz, R., & Lieb, C. (2006). Formative assessment pre-test to identify college students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions and learning difficulties in biology. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 741–762.Google Scholar

Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Minute-by-minute and day-by-day. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 18–24.Google Scholar

Leyton, F. S. (1983). The extent to which group instruction supplemented by mastery of initial cognitive prerequisites approximates the learning effectiveness of one-to-one tutorial methods. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar

Marzano, R. J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.Google Scholar

Mattern, K., Sanchez, E., & Ndum, E. (2017). Why do achievement measures underpredict female academic performance? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 36, 47–57.Google Scholar

Morrison, H. C. (1926). The practice of teaching in the secondary school. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Myles, B. S., Ormsbee, C. K., & Simpson, R. L. (1997). Reflections on “General and special educators’ perceptions of preassessment-related activities and team members.” Exceptionality, 7, 193–197.Google Scholar

Pendergrass, E. (2013). Differentiation: It starts with pre-assessment. Educational Leadership, 71(4).Google Scholar

Scriven, M. S. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In Tyler, R. W., Gagne, R. M., & Scriven, M. (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (pp. 39–83). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar

Silver, H. F., Strong, R. W., & Perini, M. J. (2000). So each may learn: Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Simpson, E. J. (1966). The classification of educational objectives: Psychomotor domain. Urbana: University of Illinois.Google Scholar

Smith, J. K., Smith, L. F., & DeLisi, R. (2001). Natural classroom assessment: Designing seamless instruction and assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Allowing for thinking styles. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 36–40.Google Scholar

Stiggins, R. (2008). An introduction to student-involved assessment for learning (5th edn.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Tomlinson, C. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsive teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Tomlinson, C. A., & Moon, T. R. (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Wagner, E. P., Sasser, H., & DiBiase, W. J. (2002). Predicting students at risk in general chemistry using pre-semester assessments and demographic information. Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 749–755.Google Scholar

Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In Gabel, D. (Ed.), Handbook of research in science teaching and learning (pp. 177–210). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Washburne, C. W. (1922). Educational measurements as a key to individualizing instruction and promotions. Journal of Educational Research, 5, 195–206.Google Scholar

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd edn.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 70–74.Google Scholar

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.Google Scholar

Brookhart, S. M., (2008). How to give to effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Brown, G. T., Harris, L. R., & Harnett, J. (2012). Teacher beliefs about feedback within an assessment for learning environment: Endorsement of improved learning over student well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 968–978.Google Scholar

Chan, P. E., Konrad, M., Gonzalez, V., Peters, M. T., & Ressa, V. A. (2014). The critical role of feedback in formative instructional practices. Intervention in School and Clinic, 50, 96–104.Google Scholar

Clarke, S. (2003). Unlocking formative assessment: Practical strategies for enhancing pupils’ learning in the primary classroom. London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar

Davies, A., & LeMahieu, P. (2003). Assessment for learning: Reconsidering portfolios and research evidence. In Segers, M., Dochy, F., & Cascallar, E. (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 141–169). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Deemer, S. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: Revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Research, 46, 73–90.Google Scholar

Department of Basic Education (DBE). (2011a). National Curriculum Statement (NCS): Curriculum and Policy Statement – Foundation Phase 6. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Basic Education.Google Scholar

Department of Basic Education (DBE). (2011b). National Protocol for Assessment Grades R-12. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Education.Google Scholar

Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar

Education Endowment Foundation (2016). Technical Appendix: Feedback. London: Education Endowment Foundation. Retrieved from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Toolkit/Technical_Appendix/EEF_Feedback_Technical_Appendix.pdf.Google Scholar

Elliott, V., Baird, J. A., Hopfenbeck, T. N., Ingram, J., Thompson, I., Usher, N., & Coleman, R. (2016). A marked improvement? A review of the evidence on written marking. London: Education Endowment Foundation.Google Scholar

Engelsen, K., & Smith, K. (2010). Is “excellent” good enough? Education Inquiry, 1(4), 415–431.Google Scholar

Eriksson, E., Björklund Boistrup, L., & Thornberg, R. (2017). A categorisation of teacher feedback in the classroom: A field study on feedback based on routine classroom assessment in primary school. Research Papers in Education, 32, 316–332.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., Eyal, T., & Finkelstein, S. R. (2010). How positive and negative feedback motivate goal pursuit. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 517–530.Google Scholar

Hargreaves, E., McCallum, B., & Gipps, C. (2000). Teacher feedback strategies in primary classrooms: New evidence. In Askow, S. (Ed.), Feedback for learning (pp. 21–31). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.Google Scholar

Hoadley, U. (2012). What do we know about teaching and learning in South African primary schools? Education as Change, 16, 187–202.Google Scholar

Irving, S. E., Harris, L. R., & Peterson, E. R. (2011). “One assessment doesn’t serve all the purposes” or does it? New Zealand teachers describe assessment and feedback. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12, 413–426.Google Scholar

Kanjee, A., & Croft, C. (2012, April). Enhancing the use of assessment for learning: Addressing challenges facing South African teachers. Paper presented at the annual American Educational Research Conference, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar

Kanjee, A., & Mthembu, J. (2015). Assessment literacy of Foundation Phase teachers: An exploratory study. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 5, 142–168.Google Scholar

Kanjee, A., & Sayed, Y. (2013). Assessment policy in post-apartheid South Africa: Challenges for improving education quality and learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20, 442–469.Google Scholar

Kanjee, A., & White, C. J. (2014). Evaluation of a national professional development programme to improve teacher formative assessment practices. Unpublished report, Department of Educational Studies, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2008). Response to assessment feedback: The effects of grades, praise, and source of information. Report No. 08-30. Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2009). Effects of differential feedback on students’ examination performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 319–333.Google Scholar

McDonald, L., Flint, A., Rubie-Davies, C. M., Peterson, E. R., Watson, P., & Garrett, L. (2016). Teaching high-expectation strategies to teachers through an intervention process. Professional Development in Education, 42, 290–307.Google Scholar

Mkhwanazi, H. N. (2013). Teachers’ use of formative assessment in the teaching of reading comprehension in grade 3. PhD thesis, University of Pretoria.Google Scholar

Mkhwanazi, H. N., Joubert, I., Phatudi, N. C., & Fraser, W. J. (2014). Teachers’ use of formative assessment for the teaching of reading comprehension in Grade 3. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 468–475.Google Scholar

Naroth, C. (2010). Constructive teacher feedback for enhancing learner performance in mathematics. Master’s thesis, University of the Free State.Google Scholar

Rubie-Davies, C. (2014). Becoming a high expectation teacher: Raising the bar. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

Rubie‐Davies, C. M., Flint, A., & McDonald, L. G. (2012). Teacher beliefs, teacher characteristics, and school contextual factors: What are the relationships? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 270–288.Google Scholar

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.Google Scholar

Sadler, R. D. 2010. Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 535–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiggins, R. J., Arter, J. A., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2004). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right, using it well. Portland, OR: Assessment Training Institute.Google Scholar

Tunstall, P., & Gipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22, 389–404Google Scholar

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.Google Scholar

Ajisaka, T. (1960). Education by Dr. Obara. Tokyo: Tamagawa University Press.Google Scholar

Allen, M., & Williams, G. (2011). Consciousness, plasticity, and connectomics: The role of intersubjectivity in human cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(20).Google Scholar

Arimoto, M. (2017). The prospect of educational assessment as a secret ingredient of effective pedagogy in the context of Japanese kizuki (with-it-ness) based on evidence-informed principles for effective teaching and learning. Annual Bulletin, Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University, 3, 10–35.Google Scholar

Assessment Reform Group. (1999). Assessment for learning: Beyond the black box. Cambridge School of Education, Cambridge University.Google Scholar

Baines, E., Rubie-Davies, C., & Blatchford, P. (2009). Improving pupil group work interaction and dialogue in primary classrooms: Results from a year-long intervention study. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 95–117.Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175–1184.Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (2008). The reconstruction of “free will” from the agentic perspective of social cognition theory. In Baer, J., Kaufman, J. C., & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds.), Are we free? Psychology and free will (pp. 86–127). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar