Andrade, H. (2008). Self-assessment through rubrics. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 60–63.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. L. & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90–105). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Andrade, H., Du, Y., & Wang, X. L. (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 Practice, 27(2), 3–13.Google Scholar

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

Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36, 671–687.Google Scholar

Brown, W. (2008). Young children assess their learning: The power of the quick check strategy. Young Children, 63(6), 14–20.Google Scholar

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22, 151–167.Google Scholar

Carless, D. (2016). Feedback as dialogue. In Peters, M. A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory (pp. 1–6). Singapore: Springer Singapore.Google Scholar

Chappuis, J. (2015). Seven strategies of assessment for learning (2nd edn.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Cheah, Y. M. (1998). The examination culture and its impact on literacy innovations: The case of Singapore. Language and Education, 12, 192–209.Google Scholar

Crisp, B. (2007). Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’ subsequent submission of assessable work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 571–581.Google Scholar

Fisher, D. (2013). The purposeful classroom. Keynote address at the Primary School Education Seminar and Exhibition 2013, Ministry of Education, Singapore.Google Scholar

Fontana, D., & Fernandes, M. (1994). Improvements in mathematics performance as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 407–417.Google Scholar

Gopinathan, S. (2001). Globalisation, the state and education policy in Singapore. In Tan, J., Gopinathan, S., & Ho, W. K. (Eds.), Challenges facing the Singapore education system today (pp. 213–251). Singapore: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Guskey, T. R., & Bailey, J. M. (2010). Developing standards-based report cards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

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

Heng, M. A. (2001). Rethinking the meaning of school beyond the academic “A.” In Tan, J., Gopinathan, S., & Ho, W. K. (Eds.), Challenges facing the Singapore education system today (pp. 108–118). Singapore: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Hogan, D., Chan, M., Rahim, R., Kwek, D., Khin, M. A., Loo, S. C., … & Luo, W. S. (2013). Assessment and the logic of instructional practice in Secondary 3 English and mathematics classrooms in Singapore. Review of Education, 1, 57–106.Google Scholar

Hounsell, D., McCune, V., Hounsell, J., & Litjens, J. (2008). The quality of guidance and feedback to students. Higher Education Research & Development, 27, 55–67.Google Scholar

Larson, R. W., & Brown, J. R. (2007). Emotional development in adolescence: What can be learned from school theatre program? Child Development, 78, 1083–1099.Google Scholar

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd edn.). London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar

Lim-Ratnam, C. (2013). Tensions in defining quality pre-school education: The Singapore context. Educational Review, 65, 416–431.Google Scholar

McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational Horizons, 87, 40–49.Google Scholar

Ministry of Education. (2009). Report of the primary education review and implementation committee. Retrieved from www.moe.gov.sg/initiatives/peri/files/peri-report.pdf.Google Scholar

Ministry of Education (2010). Press release. PERI Holistic Assessment seminar 2010: 16 schools share Holistic Assessment practices and resources. Retrieved from http://archive-sg.com/sg/m/moe.gov.sg/2015–12 25_7252662_131/Ministry_of_Education_Singapore_Press_Releases_PERI_Holistic_Assessment_Seminar_2010_8212_16_Schools_Share_Holistic_Assessment_Practices_and_Resources/.Google Scholar

Munns, G., & Woodward, H. (2006). Student engagement and student self-assessment: The REAL framework. Assessment in Education, 13, 193–213.Google Scholar

Murtagh, L. (2014). The motivational paradox of feedback: Teacher and student perceptions. The Curriculum Journal, 25, 516–541.Google Scholar

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Testing the joy out of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 14–18.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 501–517.Google Scholar

O’Connor, K. (2009). How to grade for learning: Linking grades to standards (3rd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

Orsmond, P., Maw, S. J., Park, J. R., Gomez, S., & Crook, A. C. (2013). Moving feedback forward: Theory to practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38, 240–252.Google Scholar

Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Rahmat, F. A., & Wong, H. M. (2017, June). Analysing the nature of feedback in classrooms in Singapore. Paper presented at the Seventh Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference, Singapore.Google Scholar

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28, 4–13.Google Scholar

Ratnam-Lim, C. T. L., & Tan, K. H. K. (2015) Large-scale implementation of formative assessment practices in an examination-oriented culture. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22, 61–78.Google Scholar

Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 11(10). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v11n10.pdf.Google Scholar

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

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

Sadler, D. R. (2010b). Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 727–743.Google Scholar

Safii, L., & Wong, H. M. (2017, June). Seeing self-assessment and teacher feedback through students’ lenses. Paper presented at the Seventh Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference, Singapore.Google Scholar

Scoles, J., Huxham, M., & McArthur, J. (2012). No longer exempt from good practice: Using exemplars to close the feedback gap for exams. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 8, 631–645.Google Scholar

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

Tan, K. H. K. (2011a). Assessment for learning in Singapore: Unpacking its meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 10, 91–103.Google Scholar

Tan, K. H. K. (2011b). Assessment reform in Singapore: Enduring, sustainable or threshold? In Berry, R. & Adamson, B. (Eds.), Assessment reform in education: Policy and practice (pp. 75–88). London: Springer.Google Scholar

Tan, K. H. K. (2013a). A framework for assessment for learning: Implications for feedback practices within and beyond the gap. International Scholarly Research Notices.Google Scholar

Tan, K. H. K. (2013b). Variation in teachers’ conceptions of alternative assessment in Singapore primary schools. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 12, 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wadsworth, B. J. (2003). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development: Foundations of constructivism (5th edn.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Wiliam, D. (2010). An integrative summary of the research literature and implications for a new theory of formative assessment. In Andrade, H. & Cizek, G. (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 18–40). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

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

Wiliam, D. (2012, April). Sustaining formative assessment with teacher learning communities. PERI HA Professional Learning Series Workshop, Ministry of Education, Singapore.Google Scholar

Wong, H. M. (2012a). The perceptions of Singaporean teachers and students toward academic self-assessments. Doctoral dissertation, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University.Google Scholar

Wong, H. M. (2012b). Students’ interview transcripts. In The perceptions of Singaporean teachers and students toward academic self-assessments. Doctoral dissertation, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University.Google Scholar

Wong, H. M. (2016). I can assess myself: Singaporean primary students’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ self-assessment ability. Education 3–13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 44, 442–457.Google Scholar

Wong, H. M. (2017). Implementing self-assessment in Singapore primary schools: Effects on students’ perceptions of self-assessment. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 12, 391–409.Google Scholar

Abington, A. (1952). Bigger and better boners. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar

Afflerbach, P. (2005). National Reading Conference policy brief: High stakes testing and reading assessment. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 151–162.Google Scholar

Albertson, B. (2007). Organization and development features of grade 8 and grade 10 writers: A descriptive study of Delaware student testing program (DSTP) essays. Research in the Teaching of English, 41, 435–465.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

Balzer, W., Doherty, M., & O’Connor, R. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback on performance. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 410–433.Google Scholar

Bazerman, C. (2016). What do sociocultural studies of writing tell us about learning to write? In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd edn., pp. 11–23). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Beach, R., & Freidrich, T. (2006). Response to writing. In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 222–233). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Beck, S., & Jeffrey, J. (2007). Genres of high-stakes writing assessments and the construct of writing competence. Assessing Writing, 12, 60–79.Google Scholar

Burdick, H., Swartz, C., Stenner, J., Fitzgerald, J., Burdick, D., & Hanlon, S. (2013). Measuring students’ writing ability on a computer-analytic developmental scale: An exploratory validity study. Literacy Research & Instruction, 52, 255–280.Google Scholar

Callahan, S. (1999). All done with the best of intentions: One Kentucky high school after six years of State Portfolio tests. Assessing Writing, 6, 5–40.Google Scholar

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 73–84.Google Scholar

Coe, M., Hanita, M., Nishioka, V., & Smiley, R. (2011). An investigation of the impact of the 6+1 Trait Writing model on grade 5 student writing achievement (NCEE 2012–4010). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Google Scholar

Coffman, W. (1966). On the validity of essay tests of achievement. Journal of Educational Measurement, 3, 151–156.Google Scholar

Coniam, D. (2009). Experimenting with a computer essay-scoring program based on ESL student writing scripts. European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 259–279.Google Scholar

Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality & Individual Differences, 13, 653–655.Google Scholar

Crossley, S., & McNamara, D. (2017). Adaptive educational technologies for literacy instruction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Culham, R. (2003). 6+1 traits of writing: The complete guide, grades 3 and up. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.Google Scholar

Dappen, L., Isernhagen, J., & Anderson, S. (2008). A statewide writing assessment model: Student proficiency and future implications. Assessing Writing, 13, 45–60.Google Scholar

De La Paz, S., Swanson, P., & Graham, S. (1998). Contribution of executive control to the revising problems of students with writing and learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 448–460.Google Scholar

Deno, S. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219–232.Google Scholar

Elliott, S., Kurz, A., & Neergaard, L. (2012). Large-scale assessment for educational accountability. In Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Urdan, T. (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Application to learning and teaching (vol. 3, pp. 111–138). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Fitzgerald, J. (1987). Research on revision in writing. Review of Educational Research, 57, 481–506.Google Scholar

Galbraith, D. (1999). Writing as a knowledge-constituting process. In Galbraith, D. & Torrance, M. (Eds.), Knowing what to write: Conceptual processes in text production (pp. 139–159). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar

Graham, S. (1997). Executive control in the revising of students with learning and writing difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 223–234.Google Scholar

Graham, S. (2014). The use of multiple forms of assessment in the service of writing. Literacy Research & Instruction, 53, 96–100.Google Scholar

Graham, S. (2018). A writer(s) within community model of writing. In Bazerman, C., Berninger, V., Brandt, D., Graham, S., Langer, J., Murphy, S., Matsuda, P., Rowe, D., & Schleppegrell, M., (Eds.), The lifespan development of writing (pp. 271–325). Urbana, IL: National Council of English.Google Scholar

Graham, S. (in press). Writers in community model: 15 recommendations for future research in using writing to promote science learning. In Prain, V. & Hand, B. (Eds.), Future research in science education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Bruch, J., Fitzgerald, J., Friedrich, L., Furgeson, J., Greene, K., Kim, J., Lyskawa, J., Olson, C. B., & Smither Wulsin, C. (2016). Teaching secondary students to write effectively (NCEE 2017–4002). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Bartlett, B., Popadopoulou, E., & Santoro, J. (2016). Acceptability of adaptations for struggling writers: A national survey with primary grade teachers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39, 5–16.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2011). Informing writing: The benefits of formative assessment. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellence in Education.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207–241.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115, 498–522.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2011). Throw ’em out or make ’em better? High-stakes writing assessments. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44, 1–12.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2015). Formative assessment and writing: A meta-analysis. Elementary School Journal, 115, 524–547.Google Scholar

Graham, S., Hebert, M., Sandbank, M., & Harris, K. R. (2016). Credibly assessing the writing achievement of young struggling writers: Application of generalizability theory. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39, 72–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Graham, S., Kiuhara, S., McKeown, D., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879–896.Google Scholar

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

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

Hendrickson, R. (1994). The literary life and other curiosities. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar

Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment and next-generation assessment systems: Are we losing an opportunity? Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar

Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: National Conference on Research in English.Google Scholar

Hillocks, G. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Horner, R., Carr, E., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–180.Google Scholar

Hosp, J. (2012). Using assessment data to make decisions about teaching and learning. In Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Urdan, T. (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Application to learning and teaching (vol. 3, pp. 87– 110). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Huang, J. (2008). How accurate are ESL students’ holistic writing scores on large-scale assessments? A generalizability theory approach. Assessing Writing, 13, 201–218.Google Scholar

Jeffrey, J. (2009). Constructs of writing proficiency in US state and national writing assessments: Exploring variability. Assessing Writing, 14, 3–24.Google Scholar

Jones, I., (1998). The effect of computer-generated spoken feedback on kindergarten students’ written narratives. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 9, 43–56.Google Scholar

Karask, H., Fer, S., & Orhan, F. (2014). The effect of using cooperative and individual weblog to enhance writing performance. Educational Technology & Society, 17, 229–241.Google Scholar

Kiuhara, S., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 136–160.Google Scholar

Kluger, A., & 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

Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79–97.Google Scholar

Lederer, R. (1993). More anguished English. New York: Dell.Google Scholar

Lederer, R. (2000). The bride of anguished English. New York: St. Martin’s.Google Scholar

Linkletter, A. (1962). Kids sure rite funny. New York: Banard Geis Associates.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A., & Smith, J. (2009a). “I really need feedback to learn”: Students’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the differential feedback message. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability, 21, 347–367.Google Scholar

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

MacArthur, C. (2016). Instruction in evaluation and revision. In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd edn., pp. 272–287). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

MacArthur, C., & Graham, S. (2016). Writing research from a cognitive perspective. In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 24–40). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

MacArthur, C., Graham, S., Schwartz, S., & Shafer, W. (1995). Evaluation of a writing instruction model that integrated a process approach, strategy instruction, and word processing. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 278–291.Google Scholar

Matsumura, L., Patthey-Chavez, G., Valdes, R., & Garnier, H. (2002). Teacher feedback, writing assignment quality, and third grade students’ revisions in lower and higher-achieving urban schools. Elementary School Journal, 103, 3–25.Google Scholar

Moore, N., & MacArthur, C. (2016). Student use of automated essay evaluation technology during revision. Journal of Writing Research, 8, 149–175.Google Scholar

Nicolaidou, I. (2013). E-portfolios supporting primary students’ writing performance and peer feedback. Computers & Education, 68, 404–415.Google Scholar

Parke, C., Lane, S., & Stone, C. (2006). Impact of a state performance assessment program in reading and writing. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12, 239–269.Google Scholar

Peterson, S. (2003). Peer response and students’ revisions of their narrative writing. LI – Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 3, 239–272.Google Scholar

Rijlaarsdam, G., Baarksma, M., Couzijn, M., Janssen, T., Braaksma, M., Tillema, M., Steendam, E., & Raedts, M. (2012). Writing. In Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Urdan, T. (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Application to learning and teaching (vol. 3, pp. 189–228). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den bergh, H., Couzijn, M., Janssen, T., Raedts, M., Steendam, E., Rogers, L., & Graham, S. (2008). A meta-analysis of single subject design writing intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 879–906.Google Scholar

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–140.Google Scholar

Salovey, P., & Haar, M. (1990). The efficacy of cognitive-behavior therapy and writing process training for alleviating writing anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 515–528.Google Scholar

Sanchez, C., Atkinson, K., Koenka, A., Moshontz, H., & Cooper, H. (in press). Self- and peer-grading of formative and summative assessments in 3rd through 12th grade classrooms: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology.Google Scholar

Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993a). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 337–354.Google Scholar

Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993b). Writing strategy instruction with gifted students: Effects of goals and feedback on self-efficacy and skills. Roeper Review, 15, 225–230.Google Scholar

Smith, J., & Lipenvich, A. (2009). Formative assessment in higher education: Frequency and consequence. In McInerey, D., Brown, G., & Liem, G. (Eds.), Student perspectives on assessment: What students can tell us about assessments for learning (pp. 279–296). Charlotte, NC: IAP.Google Scholar

Stiggins, R. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 324–328.Google Scholar

Toorenaar, A., & Van den Bergh, H. (2008). Observations of peers learning to write. Journal of Writing Research, 1, 53–83.Google Scholar

Underwood, J., & Tregidgo, A. (2006). Improving student writing through effective feedback: Best practices and recommendations. Journal of Teaching Writing, 22, 73–98.Google Scholar

Welch, N. (1977). Getting restless: Rethinking revision in writing instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton Cook.Google Scholar

Wiliam, D. (2006). Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational Assessment, 11, 283–289.Google Scholar

Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2015). Automated essay evaluation software in English language arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100, 94–109.Google Scholar

Zheng, B., Lawrence, J., Warschauer, M., & Lin, C. (2015). Middle school students’ writing and feedback in a cloud-based classroom environment. Technology, Knowledge, Learning, 20, 201–229.Google Scholar

Zumbrunn, S., Marrs, S., & Mewborn, C. (2016). Toward a better understanding of student perceptions of writing feedback: A mixed methods study. Reading & Writing, 29, 349–370.Google Scholar

Attali, Y. (2015). Effects of multiple-try feedback and question type during mathematics problem solving on performance in similar problems. Computers & Education, 86, 260–267.Google Scholar

Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389–407.Google Scholar

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.Google Scholar

Bee, S. N., & Kaur, B. (2014). Using enhanced feedback to improve the learning of mathematics. The Mathematics Educator, 15, 101–110.Google Scholar

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. The Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–44.Google Scholar

Bush, W. S. (1989). Mathematical anxiety in upper elementary school teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 89, 499–509.Google Scholar

Butler, A. C., Godbole, N., & Marsh, E. J. (2013). Explanation feedback is better than correct answer feedback for promoting transfer of learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 290–298.Google Scholar

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standards1.pdf.Google Scholar

Confrey, J. (1990). A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. Review of Research in Education, 1, 3–55.Google Scholar

Fazio, L., & Siegler, R. (2011). Teaching fractions. Belley, France: Gonnet Imprimeur.Google Scholar

Hadley, K., & Dorward, J. (2011). The relationship among elementary teachers’ mathematics anxiety, mathematics instructional practices, and student mathematics achievement. Journal of Curriculum & Instruction, 5(2), 27–44.Google Scholar

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

Hodgen, J., & Wiliam, D. (2006). Mathematics inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the mathematics classroom. London: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar

Karp, K. S. (1991). Elementary school teachers’ attitudes toward mathematics: The impact on students’ autonomous learning skills. School Science and Mathematics, 91, 265–270.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

Lampert, M. (2010). Learning teaching in, from, and for practice: What do we mean? Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 21–34.Google Scholar

Meikle, E. M. (2016). Selecting and sequencing students’ solution strategies. Teaching Children Mathematics, 23, 226–234.Google Scholar

Núñez-Peña, M., Bono, R., & Suárez-Pellicioni, M. (2015). Feedback on students’ performance: A possible way of reducing the negative effect of math anxiety in higher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 70, 80–87.Google Scholar

Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W., & Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in mathematics: Mediated by students’ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 27, 63–73.Google Scholar

Roos, B., & Hamilton, D. (2005). Formative assessment: A cybernetic viewpoint. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice, 12, 7–20.Google Scholar

Schroth, M. L. (1992). The effects of delay of feedback on a delayed concept formation transfer task. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 78–82.Google Scholar

Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematical discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar

Tchoshanov, M., Cruz, M. D., Huereca, K., Shakirova, K., Shakirova, L., & Ibragimova, E. N. (2017). Examination of lower secondary mathematics teachers’ content knowledge and its connection to students’ performance. International Journal of Science & Math Education, 15, 683–702.Google Scholar

Welder, R. M. (2012). Improving algebra preparation: Implications from research on student misconceptions and difficulties. School, Science and Mathematics, 112, 255–264.Google Scholar

Askew, S. (2000). Feedback for learning. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213–238.Google Scholar

Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Bennett, N., Desforges, C., Cockburn, A., & Wilkinson, B. (1984). The quality of pupil learning experiences. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25.Google Scholar

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

Colvin, G. (2008). Talent is overrated: What really separates world-class performers from everybody else. London: Nicholas Brealey.Google Scholar

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some issues. In Ericsson, K. A. (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and science, sports, and games (pp. 14–64). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.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. 34–43). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hattie, J. (1999, August). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture, professor of education, University of Auckland. Retrieved from www.arts.auckland.ac.nz/staff/index.cfm?P=5049.Google Scholar

Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

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

Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In Lester, J. F. K. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Kennewell, S. (2001). Using affordance and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1–2), 101–116.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

Kroog, H., King Hess, K., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2016). Implement effective and efficient approaches to formal formative assessment that will save time and boost student learning. Educational Leadership, 73(7), 22–25.Google Scholar

Li, M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Thummaphan, P. (2014, April). Students’ use of written feedback in science notebooks. Paper presented at the AERA annual meeting, Philadelphia.Google Scholar

Marshall, B., Carmichael, P., & Drummond, M.-J. (2007). Learning how to learn in classrooms. In James, M., McCormick, R., Black, P., Carmichael, P., Drummond, M.-J., Fox, A., MacBeath, J., Marshall, B., Pedder, D., Procter, R., Swaffield, S., Swann, J., & Wiliam, D. (Eds.), Improving learning how to learn: Classrooms, schools, and network (pp. 56–71). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2012). Learning targets: Helping students aim for understanding in today’s lesson. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Google Scholar

Nebelsick-Gullett, L., Hamen Farrar, C., Huff, K., & Packman, S. (2013). Design of interim assessment for instructional purpose: A case study using evidence centered design in advanced placement. In Lissitz, R. W. (Ed.), Informing the practice of teaching using formative and interim assessments (pp. 21–48). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Perrenoud, P. (1998). From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning process: Towards a wider conceptual field. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 5(1), 85–102.Google Scholar

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4–13.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2010). Developing and Evaluating Measures of Formative Assessment Practice (DEMFAP) theoretical and methodological approach. Manuscript, Laboratory of Educational Assessment, Research, and Innovation (LEARN), University of Colorado Denver.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry: Exploring teachers’ practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(3–4), 205–235.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers’ informal formative assessment practices and students’ understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 57–84.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Furtak, E., Ayala, C., Yin, Y., & Shavelson, R. J. (2010). Formative assessment, motivation, and science learning. In Cizek, G. J. & Andrade, H. (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 139–158). New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Iverson, H., & Sands, D. (2013). Video logging approach. Document for Second Advisory Board Meeting, Laboratory of Educational Assessment, Research, and Innovation, University of Colorado Denver.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2004). On the use of students’ science notebooks as an assessment tool. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 61–85.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2011, April). Looking into the teachers’ feedback practices: How teachers interpret students’ work. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2013a). Examining formative feedback in the classroom context: New research perspectives. In McMillan, J. H. (Ed.), Handbook on research on classroom assessment (pp. 215–232). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2013b). Analyzing teachers’ feedback practices in response to students’ work in science classrooms. Special Issue on Using Evidence to Take Action: Strategies Teachers Use to Deconstruct Student Work. Applied Measurement in Education, 26(3), 163–175.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Kroog, H. (2016). The impact of observation sampling strategies on the accuracy of inferences about teacher’s formative assessment practices. Paper submitted for publication.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Kroog, H., & Sands, D. (2015, August). Teachers’ judgments on-the-fly: Teachers’ response patterns to students’ responses in the context of informal formative assessment. Paper presented at the Symposium “From Teachers’ Assessment Practices to Shared Professional Judgment Cultures” at the European Association for Research on Instruction and Learning, Limassol, Cyprus.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Sands, D. (2009). Developing and Evaluating Measures of Formative Assessment Practices (DEMFAP). Proposal submitted to the Institute of Education Sciences, Cognition and Student Learning. Award ID: R305A100571.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Sands, D., & Kroog, H. (2016). Developing and Evaluating Measures of Formative Assessment Practices (DEMFAP): Technical report on instrument development and evaluation. Technical report submitted to the Institute of Education Sciences, Washington, DC, IES Grant R305A100571.Google Scholar

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

Shavelson, R. J., Yin, Y., Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Ayala, C. (2008). On the role and impact of formative assessment on science inquiry teaching and learning. In Coffey, J., Douglas, R., & Stearns, C. (Eds.), Assessing science learning: Perspectives from research and practice (pp. 21–36). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.Google Scholar

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

Syed, M. (2010). Bounce: Mozart, Federer, Picasso, Beckman, and the science of success. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (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

Arnold, J. A. (1995). Effects of competency-based methods of instruction and self-observation on ensemble directors’ use of sequential patterns. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43, 127–138.Google Scholar

Banton, L. J. (1995). The role of visual and auditory feedback during the sight-reading of music. Psychology of Music, 23, 3–16.Google Scholar

Becker, W. C., & Englemann, S. (1976). Analysis of achievement data on six cohorts of low-income children from 20 school districts in the University of Oregon direct instruction follow through model. College of Education, Oregon University. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 145 922.Google Scholar

Bella, S. D. (2015). Defining poor-pitch singing: A problem of measurement and sensitivity. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32, 272–282.Google Scholar

Benson, W. L. (1989). The effect of models, self-observation, and evaluation on the modification of specified teaching behaviors of an applied music teacher. Update: The Applications of Research in Music Education, 7(2), 28–31.Google Scholar

Bergee, M. J. (1993). A comparison of faculty, peer, and self-evaluation of applied brass jury performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 19–27.Google Scholar

Bergee, M. J. (1997). Relationships among faculty, peer, and self-evaluations of applied performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 601–612.Google Scholar

Bergee, M. J., & Cecconi-Roberts, L. (2002). Effects of small-group peer interaction on self-evaluation of music performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 256–268.Google Scholar

Bowers, J. (1997). Sequential patterns and the music teaching effectiveness of elementary education majors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 428–443.Google Scholar

Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, 51, 5–32.Google Scholar

Burwell, K. (2016). SEMPRE studies in the psychology of music: Studio-based instrumental learning. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

Byo, J. L. (1994). Tracing the evolution of a research line: The role of sequential patterns in structuring the rehearsal. Journal of the World Association of Symphonic Bands and Ensembles, 1, 67–79.Google Scholar

Byo, J. L., & Schlegel, A. L. (2016). Effects of stimulus octave and timbre on the tuning accuracy of advanced college instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64, 344–359.Google Scholar

Carpenter, R. A. (1988). A descriptive analysis of relationships between verbal behaviors of teacher-conductors and ratings of selected junior and senior high school band rehearsals. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 7, 37–40.Google Scholar

Cavitt, M. E. (2003). A descriptive analysis of error correction in instrumental music rehearsals. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51, 218–230.Google Scholar

Chaffin, C., & Manfredo, J. (2009). Perceptions of preservice teachers regarding feedback and guided reflection in an instrumental early field experience. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 19(2), 57–72.Google Scholar

Daniel, R. (2001). Self-assessment in performance. British Journal of Music Education, 18, 215–226.Google Scholar

Daniel, R. (2004). Peer assessment in music performance: The development, trial and evaluation of a methodology for the Australian tertiary environment. British Journal of Music Education, 21, 89–110.Google Scholar

Daniel, R. (2006). Exploring music instrument teaching and learning environments: Video analysis as a means of elucidating process and learning outcomes. Music Education Research, 8, 161–215.Google Scholar

Daniel, R. (2007, July). Closing the feedback loop: An investigation and analysis of student evaluations of peer and staff assessments in music performance. Paper presented at the XXIXth meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Music Education, Music Values, Research, and Initiatives, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar

Droe, K. L. (2012). Effect of verbal praise on achievement goal orientation, motivation, and performance attribution. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 23, 63–78.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A. (1985). Wind instrumentalists’ intonational performance of selected musical intervals. Journal of Research in Music Education, 33, 101–111.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A. (1994). Bringing the art of rehearsing into focus: The rehearsal frame as a model for prescriptive analysis of rehearsing conducting. Journal of Band Research, 30, 78–95.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A. (2005). Intelligent music teaching: Essays on the core principals of effective instruction. Austin, TX: Learning and Behavior Resources.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A., & Blackmail, M. D. (1991). The relationship between observers’ recorded teacher behavior and evaluation of music instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 39, 290–297.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A., Cash, C. D., & Allen, S. E. (2011). Focus of attention affects performance of motor skills in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 44–55.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A., & Henninger, J. C. (1998). Effects of verbal corrections on student attitude and performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 482–495.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A., & Henninger, J. C. (2002). Teachers’ verbal corrections and observers’ perceptions of teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 75–87.Google Scholar

Duke, R. A., & Prickett, C. A. (1987). The effect of differentially focused observation on evaluation of instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35, 27–37.Google Scholar

Dunn, D. E. (1997). Effect of rehearsal hierarchy and reinforcement on attention, achievement, and attitude of selected choirs. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 547–567.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. J., & Thayer, J. F. (2010). Music and autonomic nervous system (dys)function. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27(4), 317–326.Google Scholar

Finney, S. A. (1997). Auditory feedback and musical keyboard performance. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 153–174.Google Scholar

Goebl, W., & Palmer, C. (2009). Synchronization of timing and motion among performing musicians. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 427–438.Google Scholar

Goolsby, T. W. (1997). Verbal instruction in instrumental rehearsals: A comparison of three career levels and preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 21–40.Google Scholar

Hargreaves, D. J. (2012). Musical imagination: Perception and production, beauty and creativity. Psychology of Music, 40, 539–557.Google Scholar

Hargreaves, D. J., MacDonald, R. A. R., & Miell, D. E. (2005). How do people communicate using music? In Miell, D. E., MacDonald, R. A. R., & Hargreaves, D. J. (Eds.), Musical communication (pp. 1–25). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Havlicek, L. L. (1968). Effect of delayed auditory feedback on musical performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 16, 308–318.Google Scholar

Ivaldi, A. (2016). Students’ and teachers’ orientation to learning and performing in music conservatoire lesson interactions. Psychology of Music, 44, 202–218.Google Scholar

Kostka, M. J. (1984). An investigation of reinforcements, time use, and student attentiveness in piano lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 32(2), 113–122.Google Scholar

MacLeod, R. B., & Napoles, J. (2011). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of teaching effectiveness during teaching episodes with positive and negative feedback. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 22, 91–102.Google Scholar

Maclin, J. P. (1993). The effect of task analysis on sequential patterns of music instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 48–56.Google Scholar

Madsen, C. H., & Madsen, C. K. (1983). Teaching/discipline: Behavioral principles toward a positive approach. Raleigh, NC: Contemporary Publishing.Google Scholar

Madsen, C. K., & Duke, R. A. (1985a). Observation of teacher/student interactions in music: Observer perceptions versus actual events. Journal of Research in Music Education, 33, 205–214.Google Scholar

Madsen, C. K, & Duke, R. A. (1985b). Perception of approval/disapproval in music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 85, 119–130.Google Scholar

Madsen, C. K., and Yarbrough, C. (1985). Competency-based music education. Raleigh, NC: Contemporary Publishing.Google Scholar

McPhail, G. J. (2010) Crossing boundaries: Sharing concepts of music teaching from classroom to studio. Music Education Research, 12, 33–45.Google Scholar

Montemayor, M., & Moss, E. A. (2009). Effects of recorded models on novice teachers’ rehearsal verbalizations, evaluations, and conducting. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57, 236–251.Google Scholar

Montemayor, M., Silvey, B. A., Adams, A. L., & Witt, K. L. (2015). Effects of internal and external focus of attention during novices’ instructional preparation on subsequent rehearsal behaviors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63, 455–468.Google Scholar

Moore, R. S. (1976). The effects of videotaped feedback self-evaluation forms on teaching skills, musicianship, and creativity of prospective elementary teachers. Bulletin for the Council of Research in Music Education, 47, 1–15.Google Scholar

Napoles, J. (2008). Relationships among instructor, peer, and self-evaluations of undergraduate music education majors’ micro-teaching experiences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56, 82–91.Google Scholar

NCCAS. (2014). National Music Standards. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/.Google Scholar

Palmer, C., Koopmans, E., Loehr, J. D., & Carter, C. (2009). Movement-related feedback and temporal accuracy in clarinet performance. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 439–449.Google Scholar

Parkes, K. A. (2010). The use of criteria specific performance rubrics for student self-assessment: A case study. In Brophy, T. (Ed.), The practice of assessment in music education: Frameworks, models, and designs (pp. 453–458). Chicago, IL: GIA Publications.Google Scholar

Powell, S. R. (2016). The influence of video reflection on preservice music teachers’ concerns in peer- and field-teaching settings. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63, 487–507.Google Scholar

Price, H. E. (1989). An effective way to teach and rehearse: Research supports using sequential patterns. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 8, 42–46.Google Scholar

Price, H. E. (1992). Sequential patterns of instruction and learning to use them. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40, 14–29.Google Scholar

Price, H. E., & Yarbrough, C. (1991). Validation of sequential patterns of instruction in music. Canadian Music Educator, Research Edition, 33, 165–174.Google Scholar

Price, H. E., & Yarbrough, C. (1993/1994). Effect of scripted sequential patterns of instruction in music rehearsals on teaching evaluations by college non-music students. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 119, 170–178.Google Scholar

Priest, T. (2006) Self-evaluation, creativity, and musical achievement. Psychology of Music, 34, 47–61.Google Scholar

Roesler, R. A. (2017) Independence pending: Teacher behaviors preceding learner problem solving. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64, 454–473.Google Scholar

Rostvall, A.-L., & West, T. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5, 213–226.Google Scholar

Salzberg, R. S., & Salzberg, C. L. (1981). Praise and corrective feedback in the remediation of incorrect left-hand positions of elementary string players. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29, 125–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, C. P. (1989). Individual differences in the perception of applied music teaching feedback. Psychology of Music, 17, 110–122.Google Scholar

Schmidt, C. P. (1995). Attributions of success, grade level, and gender as factors in choral students’ perceptions of teacher feedback. Journal of Research in Music Education, 43, 313–329.Google Scholar

Schmidt, C. P., & Zdzinski, S. F. (1993). Cited quantitative research articles in music education research journals, 1975–1990: A content analysis of selected studies. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 5–18.Google Scholar

Siebenaler, D. J. (1997). Analysis of teacher–student interactions in the piano lessons of children and adults. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 6–20.Google Scholar

Spahn, C., Walther, J. C., & Nusseck, M. (2015). The effectiveness of a multimodal concept of audition training for music students in coping with music performance anxiety. Psychology of Music, 44, 893–909.Google Scholar

Speer, D. R. (1994). An analysis of sequential patterns of instruction in piano lessons. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42, 14–26.Google Scholar

Sundberg, J., & Verrillo, R. T. (1992) Editorial. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9(3), 277–280.Google Scholar

Svec, C. L. (2017). The effects of instruction on the singing ability of children ages 5 to 11: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Music, advance online publication. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735617709920.Google Scholar

Todd, N. P. (1993). Vestibular feedback in musical performance: Response to somatosensory feedback in musical performance. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 10, 379–382.Google Scholar

Welch, G. F. (1985). A schema theory of how children learn to sing in tune. Psychology of Music, 13, 3–18.Google Scholar

Welch, G. F., Howard, D. M., & Rush, C. (1989). Real-time visual feedback in the development of vocal pitch accuracy in singing. Psychology of Music, 17, 146–157.Google Scholar

Whitaker, J. A. (2011). High school band students’ and directors’ perceptions of verbal and nonverbal teaching behaviors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 59, 290–309.Google Scholar

Wolfe, D. E., & Jellison, J. A. (1990). Music and elementary education students’ evaluations of music-teaching scripts. Journal of Research in Music Education, 38, 311–321.Google Scholar

Yarbrough, C., & Madsen, K. (1998). The evaluation of teaching in choral rehearsals. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 469–481.Google Scholar

Yarbrough, C., & Price, H. E. (1981). Prediction of performer attentiveness based on rehearsal activity and teacher behavior. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29, 209–217.Google Scholar

Yarbrough, C., & Price, H. E. (1989). Sequential patterns of instruction in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37, 179–187.Google Scholar

Yarbrough, C., Wapnick, J., & Kelley, R. (1979). Effect of videotape feedback techniques on performance, verbalization, and attitude of beginning conductors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 27, 103–112.Google Scholar

Younger, K. G. (1998). An observational analysis of instructional effectiveness in intermediate level band and orchestra rehearsals. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar

ACT, Inc. (2017). ACT Tessera social and emotional learning assessment: Comprehensive theory of action. Retrieved from: https://pages2.act.org/rs/035-EZR-959/images/Tessera_Theory_of_Action.pdf?aliId=62500134.Google Scholar

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.Google Scholar

Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9–30.Google Scholar

Belfield, C., Bowden, A. B., Klapp, A., Levin, H., Shand, R., & Zander, S. (2015). The economic value of social and emotional learning. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 6, 508–544.Google Scholar

Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health behaviors: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 887–919.Google Scholar

Brackett, M. A., & Rivers, S. E. (2014). Transforming students’ lives with social and emotional learning. In Pekrun, R. & Linnebrink-Gracia, L. (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

CASEL. (2015). Effective social and emotional learning programs: Middle and high school edition. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved from: https://casel.org/middle-and-high-school-edition-casel-guide/.Google Scholar

CASEL. (2017). What is SEL? Retrieved from: https://casel.org/what-is-sel/.Google Scholar

Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’ perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. New York: Conference Board. Retrieved from www.conference-board.org/pdf_free/BED-06-Workforce.pdf.Google Scholar

Character Lab. (2017). Character Growth Card. Retrieved from https://cdn.characterlab.org/assets/Character-Growth-Card-cad815b0b3ba79c794bcfd3a89e2a8d5ac3057963fff02cee539d8d9af1b9777.pdf.Google Scholar

Conley, D. T., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Creating systems of assessment for deeper learning. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.Google Scholar

Corcoran, R. P., Cheung, A., Kim, E., & Chen, X. (2017). Effective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Educational Research Review. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.12.001.Google Scholar

Damian, R. I., Su, R., Shanahan, M., Trautwein, U., & Roberts, B. W. (2014). Can personality traits and intelligence compensate for background disadvantage? Predicting status attainment in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 473–489.Google Scholar

Deary, I. J., Whalley, L. J., & Starr, J. M. (2003). IQ at age 11 and longevity: Results from a follow-up of the Scottish Mental Survey 1932. In Finch, C. E., Robine, J.-M., & Christen, Y. (Eds.), Brain and longevity: Perspectives in longevity (pp. 153–164). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programs. Educational Research Review, 3, 101–129.Google Scholar

Duckworth, A. L., & Yeager, D. S. (2015). Measurement matters: Assessing personal qualities other than cognitive ability for educational purposes. Educational Researcher, 44, 237–251.Google Scholar

Dunesbury, L., Weissberg, R. P., Goren, P., & Domitrovich, C. (2014). State standards to advance social and emotional learning: Findings from CASEL’s state scan of social and emotional learning standards, preschool through high school, 2014. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved from www.casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/casel-brief-on-state-standards-january-2014.pdf.Google Scholar

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal intervention. Child Development, 82, 405–432.Google Scholar

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 294–309.Google Scholar

Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. Retrieved from www.nap.edu/download/10022.Google Scholar

Ecclestone, K., & Hayes, D. (2009). Changing the subject: The educational implications of developing emotional wellbeing. Oxford Review of Education, 35, 371–389.Google Scholar

Elias, M. J., Ferrito, J. J., & Moceri, D. C. (2016 ). The other side of the report card: Assessing students’ social, emotional, and character development. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar

Ge, X., & Conger, R. D. (1999). Adjustment problems and emerging personality characteristics from early to late adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 429–459.Google Scholar

Haller, E. P., Child, D. A., & Walberg, H. J. (1988). Can comprehension be taught? A quantitative synthesis of “metacognitive” studies. Educational Researcher, 17, 5–8.Google Scholar

Hart Research Associates. (2010). Raising the bar: Employers’ views on college learning in the wake of the economic downturn. Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2009_EmployerSurvey.pdf.Google Scholar

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

Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test anxiety. Review of Educational Research, 58, 7–77.Google Scholar

Hezlett, S., Kuncel, N., Vey, M., Ahart, A., Ones, D., Campbell, J., & Camara, W. (2001). The effectiveness of the SAT in predicting success early and late in college: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar

Hooper, A. C., Cullen, M. J., & Sackett, P. R. (2006). Operational threats to the use of situational judgment tests: Faking, coaching, and retesting issues. In Weekley, J. and Ployhart, R. (Eds.), Situational judgment tests (pp. 205–323). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

James, W. (1981). The principles of psychology. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Originally published in 1890.)Google Scholar

Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Adams, R., Perry, D. G., Workman, K. A., Furdella, J. Q., & Egan, S. K. (2002). Agreeableness, extraversion, and peer relationships in early adolescents: Winning friends and deflecting aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 224–251.Google Scholar

John, O. P., & De Fruyt, F. D. (2015). Framework for the Longitudinal Study of Social and Emotional Skills in Cities. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=EDU/CERI/CD(2015)13&docLanguage=En.Google Scholar

Johnston, P. H. (2012). Opening minds. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.Google Scholar

Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., Hoglund, W. L. G., & Aber, J. L. (2010). A school-randomized clinical trial of an integrated social-emotional learning and literacy intervention: Impacts after 1 school year. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 829–842.Google Scholar

Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541.Google Scholar

Kautz, T., Heckman, J. J., Diris, R., ter Weel, B. T., & Borghans, L. (2014). Fostering and measuring skills: Improving noncognitive skills to promote lifetime success. OECD, Educational and Social Progress. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/Fostering-and-Measuring-Skills-Improving-Cognitive-and-Non-Cognitive-Skills-to-Promote-Lifetime-Success.pdf.Google Scholar

Kelley, T. L. (1927). The interpretation of educational measurements. Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book.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

Kobrin, J. L., Patterson, B. F., Shaw, E. J., Mattern, K. D., & Barbuti, S. M. (2008). Validity of the SAT® for predicting first-year college grade point average. College Board Research Rep. No. 2008-5. New York: College Board.Google Scholar

Kyllonen, P. C., Lipnevich, A. A., Burrus, J., & Roberts, R. D. (2014). Personality, motivation, and college readiness: A prospectus for assessment and development. ETS Research Report Series, 2014, 1–48.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., McCallen, L. N., Miles, K. P., & Smith, J. K. (2014). Mind the gap! Students’ use of exemplars and detailed rubrics as formative assessment in writing. Instructional Science, 42, 539–559.Google Scholar

Lipnevich, A. A., Preckel, F., & Roberts, R. D. (2016). Psychosocial constructs: Knowns, unknowns, and future directions. In Lipnevich, A. A., Preckel, F., and Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Psychosocial skills and school systems in the 21st century: Theory, research, and practice. Springer.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

Marzano, R. J. (2010). Final topic assessment rubric. Social and emotional learning standards rubric assessment system and the scales, the handbook, and implementation. Unpublished documents prepared for the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL).Google Scholar

Marzano, R. J. (2015). Using formative assessment with SEL skills. In Durlak, J. A., Domitrovich, C. E., Weissberg, R. P., & Gullotta, T. P. (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 336–347). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Mattern, K. D., & Patterson, B. F. (2011).The validity of the SAT for predicting fourth-year grades: 2006 SAT validity sample. College Board Statistical Report 2011-7. New York: College Board.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, 81–97.Google Scholar

National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Report by the Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Payton, J., Weissberg, R. P., Durlak, J. A., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., Schellinger, K. B., & Pachan, M. (2008). The positive impact of social and emotional learning for kindergarten to eighth-grade students: Findings from three scientific reviews. Chicago, IL: Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved from www.casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/PDF-4-the-positive-impact-of-social-and-emotional-learning-for-kindergarten-to-eighth-grade-students-executive-summary.pdf.Google Scholar

Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338.Google Scholar

Primi, R., Santos, D., John, O. P., & De Fruyt, F. (2016). Development of an inventory assessing social and emotional skills in Brazilian youth. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32, 5–16.Google Scholar

Robbins, S. B., Allen, J., Casillas, A., Peterson, C. H., & Le, H. (2006). Unraveling the differential effects of motivational and skills, social, and self-management measures from traditional predictors of college outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 598–616.Google Scholar

Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261–288.Google Scholar

Robbins, S. B., Oh, I., Lee, H., & Buton, C. (2009). Intervention effects on college performance and retention as mediated by motivational, emotional, and social control factors: Integrated meta-analytic path analyses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1163–1184.Google Scholar

Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R, Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345.Google Scholar

Roberts, B. W., Walton, K., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1–25.Google Scholar

Roberts, R. D., Martin, J. E., & Olaru, G. (2015). A Rosetta stone for noncognitive skills: Understanding, assessing, and enhancing noncognitive skills in primary and secondary education. Asia Society and Professional Examination Service. Retrieved from: https://pages2.act.org/rosetta-stone-for-noncognitive-skills.html.Google Scholar

Schmidt, F., & Hunter, J. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274.Google Scholar

Schonfeld, D. J., Adams, R. E., Fredstrom, B. K., Weissberg, R. P., Gilman, R., Voyce, C., Tomlin, R., & Speese-Linehan, D. (2015). Cluster-randomized trial demonstrating impact on academic achievement of elementary social emotional learning. School Psychology Quarterly, 30, 406–420.Google Scholar

Schunk, D. H. (2008). Cognition and instruction. In Learning theories: An educational perspective (pp. 278–323). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th edn.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar

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

Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2005). An IRT approach to constructing and scoring pairwise preference items involving stimuli on different dimensions: An application to the problem of faking in personality assessment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 184–201.Google Scholar

Stemler, S. E. (2012). What should university admissions tests predict? Educational Psychologist, 47, 5–17.Google Scholar

Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.Google Scholar

Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, R. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88, 1156–1171.Google Scholar

Walton, K. E., & Billera, K. A. (2016). Personality development during the school-aged years: Implications for theory, research, and practice. In Lipnevich, A. A., Preckel, F., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Psychosocial skills and school systems in the 21st century: Theory, research, and practice. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar

Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why don’t students like school? A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Ziegler, M., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.) (2011). New perspectives on faking in personality assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Zins, J., Weissberg, R. P., Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What does research say? New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar

Adcroft, A. (2011). The mythology of feedback. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(4), 405–419.Google Scholar

Alexander, F. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 411–431.Google Scholar

Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427–441.Google Scholar

Barrie, S. (2006). Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates. Higher Education, 51(2), 215–241.Google Scholar

Barrie, S. (2007). A conceptual framework for the teaching and learning of generic graduate attributes. Studies in Higher Education, 32(4), 439–458.Google Scholar

Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., Bennett, S., Hall, M., & Molloy, E. (2016). Support for assessment practice: Developing the Assessment Design Decisions Framework. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 545–556.Google Scholar

Bennett, S., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Molloy, E., & Boud, D. (2017). How technology shapes assessment design: Findings from a study of university teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 672–682.Google Scholar

Berdahl, R. (1990). Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British universities. Studies in Higher Education, 15(2), 169–180.Google Scholar

Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (2nd edn.). Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar

Blair, A. (2017). Understanding first-year students’ transition to university: A pilot study with implications for student engagement, assessment, and feedback. Politics, 37(2), 215–228.Google Scholar

Bloxham, S., & West, A. (2004). Understanding the rules of the game: Marking peer assessment as medium for developing students’ conceptions of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 721–733.Google Scholar

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

Boud, D., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Bennett, S., Joughin, G., & Molloy, E. (2016). Reframing assessment research through a practice perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 41(1), 1–12.Google Scholar

Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712.Google Scholar

Carless, D. (2013). Sustainable feedback and the development of student self-evaluative capacities. In Merry, S., Price, M., Carless, D., & Taras, M. (Eds.), Reconceptualising feedback in higher education: Developing dialogue with students (pp. 113–122). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Carless, D. (2016). Feedback as dialogue. In Peters, M. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory (pp. 1–6). Singapore: Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar

Carless, D., & Chan, K. (2017). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 930–941.Google Scholar

Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407.Google Scholar

Carroll, D. (2014). Graduate course experince 2013: A report on the course experience perceptions of recent graduates. Melbourne: Graduate Careers Australia.Google Scholar

Cartwright, P., Ryan, J., Hacker, P., Powell, E., & Reidy, J. (2000, November). Collaboration and interaction: Modelling explored. Paper presented at the Third National Language and Academic Skills Conference: Sources of Confusion. La Trobe University, Bundoora.Google Scholar

Cassidy, S. (2006). Developing employability skills: Peer assessment in higher education. Education+Training, 48(7), 508–517.Google Scholar

Chanock, K. (2004). Introducing student to the culture of enquiry in an arts degree. Milperra (NSW): HERDSA.Google Scholar

Chanock, K. (2007). What academic language and learning advisers bring to the scholarship of learning and teaching: Problems and possibilities for dialogue with the disciplines. Higher Education Research and Development, 26(3), 269–280.Google Scholar

Clerehan, R., & Walker, I. (2003). Student perceptions of preparedness for first-year university assignment writing: The discipline of marketing. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 2(1), 37–46.Google Scholar

Craigie, D. (1998, July). Hold on now! What are universities about anyway? Paper presented at the Third Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference: Strategies for Success in Transition Years. Auckland Institute of Technology in conjunction with Queensland University of Technology, Auckland.Google Scholar

Dawson, P. (2015). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–14.Google Scholar

Dawson, P., & Henderson, M. (2017). How does technology enable scaling up assessment for learning? In Carless, D., Bridges, S., Chan, C., & Glofcheski, Rick (Eds.), Scaling up Assessment for Learning in Higher Education (pp. 209–222). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar

Dawson, P., van der Meer, J., Skalicky, J., & Cowley, K. (2014). On the effectiveness of supplemental instruction: A systematic review of supplemental instruction and peer-assisted study sessions literature between 2001 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 84(4), 609–639.Google Scholar

Ecclestone, K. (2001). “I know a 2:1 when I see it”: Understanding criteria for degree classifications in franchised university programmes. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 25(3), 301–313.Google Scholar

Eley, M. (2006). Teachers’ conceptions of teaching, and the making of specific decisions in planning to teach. Higher Education, 51(2), 191–214.Google Scholar

Elwood, J., & Klenowski, V. (2002). Creating communities of shared practice: The challenge of assessment use in learning and teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (3), 243–256.Google Scholar

Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.Google Scholar

Francis, G. (2005, April). An approach to report writing in statistics courses. Paper presented at the IASE/ISI Satellite Conference on Statistics Education and Communication of Statistics. University of Technology Sydney.Google Scholar

Gair, M., & Mullins, G. (2001). Hiding in plain sight. In Margolis, E. (Ed.), The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 21–41). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gee, J. P. (2000). The New Literacy Studies: From “socially situated” to the work of the social. In Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanic, R. (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 180–196). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University.Google Scholar

Greatorex, J. (2003). Developing and applying level descriptors. Westminster Studies in Education, 26(2), 125–133.Google Scholar

Harvey, L. (2000). New realities: The relationship between higher education and employment. Tertiary Education & Management, 6(1), 3–17.Google Scholar

Hattie, J. (2009a). The black box of tertiary assessment: An impending revolution. In Meyer, L. H., Davidson, S., Anderson, H., Fletcher, R., Johnston, P. M., & Rees, M. (Eds.), Tertiary assessment and higher education student outcomes: Policy, practice and research (pp. 259–275). Wellington: Ako Aotearoa.Google Scholar

Hattie, J. (2009b). Visible learning: A synthesis of 800+ meta-analyses on achievement. Oxford: Routledge.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. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66.Google Scholar

Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2014). UK review of the provision of information about higher education: National Student Survey results and trends analysis 2005–2013. HEFCE.Google Scholar

Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

James, B., Skillen, J., Percy, A., Tootell, H., & Irvine, H. (2003, November). From integration to transformation. Paper presented at the Fifth National Language and Academic Skills Conference: Challenges, Initiatives, Evaluations and Consequences. Flinders University, Adelaide.Google Scholar

Krause, K. (2001). The university essay writing experience: A pathway for academic integration during transition. Higher Education Research and Development, 20(1), 147–168.Google Scholar

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Lawson, R., Kift, S., Wilson, K., Boud, D., Lee, N., & Deem, R. (2015). Whole of degree curriculum design: Transitioning students in, through and out of higher education. Retrieved from http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/33277/1/whole%20degree.pdf.Google Scholar

Lea, M. (1994). “I thought I could write until I came here”: Student writing in higher education. In Gibb, G. (Ed.), Improving student learning (pp. 216–225). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development.Google Scholar

Lea, M. (2004). Academic literacies: A pedagogy for course design. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 739–756.Google Scholar

Lea, M., & Stierer, B. (2000). Introduction. In Lea, M. & Stierer, B. (Eds.), Student writing in higher education: New contexts (pp. 1–13). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar

Lea, M., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172.Google Scholar

Lea, M., & Street, B. (2000). Student writing and staff feedback in higher education: An academic literacies approach. In Lea, M. & Stierer, B. (Eds.), Student writing in higher education: New contexts (pp. 32–46). Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar

Lea, M., & Street, B. (2006). The “academic literacies” model: Theory and applications. Theory into Practice, 45(4), 368–377.Google Scholar

Lehtomäki, E., Moate, J., & Posti-Ahokas, H. (2016). Global connectedness in higher education: Student voices on the value of cross-cultural learning dialogue. Studies in Higher Education, 41(11), 2011–2027.Google Scholar

Levin, E. (2000, November). Making expectations clear. Paper presented at the Third National Language and Academic Skills Conference: Sources of Confusion. La Trobe University, Bundoora.Google Scholar

Li, J., & De Luca, R. (2014). Review of assessment feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 378–393.Google Scholar

Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing and “academic literacies”: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and Education, 17(3), 192–207.Google Scholar

Lillis, T., & Turner, J. (2001). Student writing in higher education: Contemporary confusion, traditional concerns. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(1), 57–68.Google Scholar

Liu, N., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290.Google Scholar

Loads, D. (2005). Signposts to success: An academic literacies approach to orientation. Paper presented at the Napier University staff conference: Using the Curriculum to Address the Needs of Individual Students. Napier University.Google Scholar

Macdonald, R., & Joughin, G. (2009). Changing assessment in higher education: A model in support of institution-wide improvement. In Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education (pp. 193–213). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Macfarlane, B. (2011). The morphing of academic practice: Unbundling and the rise of the para‐academic. Higher Education Quarterly, 65(1), 59–73.Google Scholar

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education.Google Scholar

Naumann, F., Yang, J., Thai, T., Ford, C., & Polly, P. (2016). Virtual patient consultations and the use of an ePortfolio assessment to support student learning of integrated professional skills. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal, 17(3), 69.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. (2006, December). Increasing success in first year courses: Assessment re-design, self-regulation and learning technologies. Paper presented at ASCILITE, Sydney.Google Scholar

Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517.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(2), 199–218.Google Scholar