A Qualitative Student Evaluation of Group Learning in Higher Education

Assessment in higher education has been dominated by traditional practices that mainly focus on grades for student progression. However, there has been some transformation in assessment due to the advancement in education. Generally, assessment is viewed as central to student learning and experience. Assessment as learning, is not just an addition to learning and teaching, but it presents an opportunity through which students’ involvement in assessment could manifest as part of learning: assessment is learning-oriented. Assessment as Learning in Higher Education is about student empowerment; hence, students take ownership of their own learning process. Furthermore, assessment as learning promotes constructivism through student engagement and knowledge construction. This bibliometric analysis analysed the trends evident from research on assessment as learning and implementation in Higher Education. Data were retrieved from the Scopus database and analysed using VOSviewer. The thematic analysis approach was also employed. The study reveals that self-assessment is important in promoting student empowerment, which is one of the benefits of assessment as learning. It is important that higher education institutions rethink assessment as learning because this might assist in achieving the 21st-century educational goal of independent learning. The study’s findings confirm that there is a need for constructive alignment of teaching, learning and assessment; hence, assessment as learning becomes more significant. The findings provided an overview of key themes, research gaps and potential areas for future research. The insight that was gained from this bibliometric analysis will be valuable for lecturers, course designers, universities, assessors and researchers seeking to improve assessment in higher education.

The strategy, which aims to promote student participation, peer interaction, and shared knowledge construction, is increasingly called into question by empirical evidence suggesting that this assumption does not consistently hold true, particularly in diverse and resource-constrained contexts. This study investigated group work assessment as a form of collaborative learning in higher education, focusing on the challenges associated with its implementation and the perceptions of both lecturers and students regarding its effectiveness. Guided by Social Constructivism Theory, which emphasises learning through social interaction and mediated collaboration, the study adopted a qualitative approach within an interpretivist paradigm. A case study design was employed, involving ten purposively selected participants, five lecturers and five final-year students, from a Faculty of Education at a selected university in South Africa. Data were generated using reflective instruments and analysed through thematic analysis in accordance with Braun and Clarke’s six-step procedure. The findings revealed that group work assessment is hindered by significant challenges, including poor communication, lack of participation, absence of leadership, and its time-consuming nature, all of which undermine meaningful collaboration. While lecturers generally perceived group work as a valuable pedagogical tool, students’ experiences were more ambivalent, highlighting a disconnect between intention and practice. The study concludes that group work assessment does not automatically foster participation and must be intentionally designed and facilitated. It recommends clear instructional guidelines, structured leadership roles, active monitoring, and assessment designs that balance collaboration with individual accountability to enhance inclusive and effective learning outcomes in higher education.

Feedback is an integral part of education and there is a substantial body of trials exploring and confirming its effect on learning. This evidence base comes mostly from studies of compulsory school age children; there is very little evidence to support effective feedback practice at higher education, beyond the frameworks and strategies advocated by those claiming expertise in the area. This systematic review aims to address this gap. We review causal evidence from trials of feedback and formative assessment in higher education. Although the evidence base is currently limited, our results suggest that low stakes‐quizzing is a particularly powerful approach and that there are benefits for forms of peer and tutor feedback, although these depend on implementation factors. There was mixed evidence for praise, grading and technology‐based feedback. We organise our findings into several evidence‐grounded categories and discuss the next steps for the field and evidence‐informed feedback practice in universities. Context and implications Rationale for this study To gain a better understanding of effective formative assessment and feedback approaches in higher education (HE). To promote a more evidence‐informed approach to teaching and learning in universities. Why the new findings matter The findings highlight a small number of promising strategies for formative assessment and feedback in HE. They also draw attention to a lack of (quality) evidence in this area overall. Implications for policy‐makers and practitioners Universities and their regulators/funders should be encouraging and supporting more, high‐quality research in this important area. Researchers in the field also need to look to developing more ambitious, higher‐quality studies which are likely to provide robust, causal conclusions about academic effectiveness (or other outcomes). Those involved in teaching and learning in university should use the findings to inform evidence‐informed approaches to formative assessment and feedback and to challenge approaches which do not appear to have foundations in strong evidence. Students could be made more aware of teaching and learning approaches that are likely to support their academic progress.

Financial accounting learning in higher education often faces challenges in ensuring that the evaluation methods used can effectively and efficiently measure students' understanding and skills. The background of this problem highlights the importance of improving the quality of assessment as an integral part of efforts to improve the quality of learning. This study aims to explore the role of e-Assessment, which is a digital technology-based assessment, in improving the quality of learning and the quality of assessment in financial accounting learning. The literature review method is used to identify, review, and synthesize various empirical studies, meta-analyses, and policy reports that discuss the implementation of e-Assessment in various educational contexts, including in the field of accounting. The results of this literature review show that the implementation of e-Assessment has several significant advantages. First, e-Assessment allows for more accurate and consistent measurement of student learning achievement, as it is able to reduce the subjectivity of assessment and increase transparency. Second, e-Assessment also improves administrative efficiency, by automating the process of assessing and reporting results, which in turn saves time and resources. In addition, e-Assessment encourages student involvement more actively in the learning process, as they get real-time feedback that helps them understand the strengths and weaknesses in their learning. In conclusion, e-Assessment not only supports more transparent and interactive learning, but also strengthens the validity and reliability of assessment results in financial accounting learning. Thus, e-Assessment can be an effective tool to support the improvement of the quality of learning and assessment in higher education, especially in the field of financial accounting

Group work in higher education is well known to promote deep learning through collaboration with peers. However, there can be issues with facilitation, perceived fairness, and motivation. The aim of this project was to explore staff and student views of a new group presentation assessment. A student survey explored preparation, experiences, and learning/skills. Two academics were interviewed. According to the survey, students felt prepared for the group work, but less so for the presentation. Students also felt their group worked well, although some did not agree that everyone contributed. Most agreed that the task was enjoyable and that they gained new knowledge. Two broad themes arose from the interviews (preparedness and student support), which link to the findings in the survey. Though the assessment format was well received, there was room to develop the support resources. The individual contribution grade for the assessment could include more weight on quality to enhance engagement. This article was published open access under a CC BY licence: https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ .

Assessment of prior learning (APL) refers to the process of validating individuals’ learning in a variety of contexts, representing a relatively new practice in many countries. In higher education, APL is used to receive access and credits based on skills and knowledge acquired mainly outside of formal academic settings. This paper focuses on validity of admission decisions based on this type of assessment in higher education. The study examines decisions made by higher education institutions for approximately 600 applicants who have used APL in order to receive admission to, and credits in the vocational teacher education programme in Sweden. The results are analysed and presented in relation to a validity discussion. A conclusion is that the existing practice of APL needs improvements in order to obtain validity and trustworthiness in the decisions made in relation to APL.

The phenomenon of Performance-Based Research Assessment (PBRA) in higher education is a national, regional, and global one. It is a broad-ranging area of research and commentary and not a field that is easy to capture or summarize. In attempting to do so, this article will predominantly draw upon the wide range of research that has been conducted on national systems of PBRA in higher education as well as the comparisons made of these different national systems. It will also address, however, the continued significance of “global league tables,” most notably the Academic Ranking of World Universities produced by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China and the Times Higher Education Supplement University World Rankings in the United Kingdom. It is important to note that these PBRA systems are constantly in flux, so anything that is written can quickly become outdated. This article is organized in terms of themes, which capture the historical and political significance of predominantly national PBRA systems and the significance they have in challenging our ideas of universities, how they should be governed and funded and ultimately in potentially re-shaping the mission of higher education institutions and changing the work done by academics and the production of disciplinary knowledge. It is a diverse research field with a wide range of disciplinary perspectives that have been taken to investigate this topic and the span of disciplinary theories and methodologies, including disciplines such as statistics, policy analysis, and sociology. Those authors writing on PBRA in higher education are academics across all disciplines within the broad areas of the sciences, social sciences, and humanities as well as non-academic managers and leaders within higher education. It is an issue that is debated by individuals across the whole system of higher education. The literature can be broadly based within two areas, a perspective that views PBRA systems as a means to improve accountability and efficiency of research in higher education, which attempts to compare and contrast the PBRA systems and argue for the best and most efficient way of organizing them while recognizing that improvements must be made to ensure fairness and equity. The other is a critique of the whole project of PBRA systems, which are seen to be allied to neo-liberal and new public management ideological agendas and employs critical theoretical perspectives to show the deleterious impacts of such systems on knowledge production within universities and academic work and identity.

This paper argues that recent work in philosophy complements the discourse of psychologists and educationists on such questions as the differences between behavioural and conceptual learning, the nature of the latter, the formation of general ideas, and the stability and transferability of knowledge. Conclusions about both teaching methods and assessment in higher education are drawn from this discussion.

Reviewed by: Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education: Views and Perspectives Cia Verschelden Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education: Views and Perspectives, ed. Peter Hernon and Robert E. Dugan. Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited, 2004. 350 p. $50(ISBN: 1-59158-098-6) In the fall of 2000, the Higher Learning Commission visited our campus on a re-accreditation site visit. The following spring we received their report—we were reaccredited but they would be back for a "focused visit" in 2005 to look at our progress on assessment of student learning. That summer, I took on the task of "capacity building" in an effort to develop a positive and sustainable assessment of student learning culture at a large, public land-grant institution. I have since met with dozens of people to talk about student learning outcomes, assessment criteria and measures, and using assessment results to improve student learning. I found it almost impossible to get through this book! In virtually every chapter, I found myself taking time to highlight interesting or essential parts, make notes in the margins, or notes to myself about what I need to do with this or that section. My notes were comments like: "The Provost must see this ASAP"; "This is exactly the argument that I've been having with Professor __________ in biology for two years"; "Every department head needs this list and this chart tomorrow;" "I told them that's how it's supposed to happen!" This book addresses real issues. It reflects on precisely the kinds of challenges that I and my colleagues from across the country experience every day in our work. I found that many of the articles provided a barometer of sorts for me. I found myself assessing our progress and reflecting on the "opportunities" still ahead. The experts in this volume have described the path that promises to lead eventually to an effective "culture of assessment" at our institutions. In several of the articles, the authors provide progress checklists, which one can use to mark off accomplishments and see very clearly the direction and purpose of the next step. When I started in this work three years ago, I began to create an assessment of student learning handbook for department heads. I included three papers as critical background reading: "Assessment Measures and Methods: Advice from NCA," by Cecilia Lopez (North Central Association Commission on Institutions of Higher Education: Opportunities for Improvement: Advice from Consultant-Evaluators on Programs to Assess Student Learning, March 1996); "Assessment of Student Achievement: Levels of Implementation," from NCA's Handbook of Accreditation, 2nd edition (March 2000); and "Moving from Paperwork to Pedagogy: Channeling Intellectual [End Page 138] Curiosity into a Commitment to Assessment," by Peggy Maki, former director of assessment for the American Association for Higher Education (AAHE Bulletin, May 2002, pp. 3-5). In addition, I highly recommended Mary Huba and Jann Freed's Learner-Centered Assessment on College Campuses (Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2000), itself ahandbook of sorts for faculty who are beginning to develop a "culture of evidence" within their degree programs. Now, in the fall of 2004, I am recommending to the provost that every College Assessment Committee have a copy of Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education. This book offers four things: (1) a review of the mandate for the kind of accountability that is addressed by assessment of student learning processes (Chapter 4, "Institutional Assessment Planning"); (2) a series of very practical and concise "how-to" instructions that reflect what I have seen work (Chapter 5, "Developing an Assessment Plan to Learn about Student Learning"); (3) some models of specific approaches that share with us some of the barriers that were encountered and overcome along the way to effective change (Chapter 9, "Evolving an Assessment of Impact on Pedagogy, Learning, and Library Support of Teaching with Digital Images" and Chapter 10, "Outcomes Assessment in a College Library: An Instructional Case Study"); and (4) a summary of the progress that has been made in colleges and universities across the country so that we have a context in which to evaluate our progress (Chapter 3, "A Decade of Assessing Student Learning: What We Have Learned, and What is Next"). One of the...

Use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in pedagogy and learning in higher education supports the concept of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). Mobile devices and applications with educational purposes are part of using online ICT and facilitate autonomous learning in education. Using mobile applications for education has significantly improved in the last few years. However, there is still a gap, in which this concept is still not widely known and frequently experienced by learners. As a part of supporting TEL in higher education and filling this gap, the department of Computer and System Sciences at Stockholm University in Sweden is planning to develop a mobile application for the SciPro system. SciPro is the computer-mediated communication platform to support enhancement of thesis quality and facilitate autonomous learning in higher education, at both Bachelor and Master levels. This study aims to investigate and evaluate learners’ perspectives about utility of mobile applications in higher education and specifically to support SciPro functionalities. Almost 95% of the respondents use mobile applications for higher education and believe in the utility of mobile applications for supporting learning in higher education. This is while there are a few respondents (less than 5%), who do not fully share this opinion. More than 70% of the respondents think that a SciPro mobile application will add value to their thesis process. Even though it may not directly affect the speed and quality of the thesis, it will increase mobility, availability, and flexibility of accessing information and resources in SciPro.KeywordsTechnology Enhanced Learning (TEL)Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)Mobile ApplicationApplicationsLearningHigher EducationThesis Process

In this opinion piece, I argue that positive emotions are so fundamental to the student experience that they deserve a prime place within activities relating to teaching and learning in higher education (HE). Research from the learning and medical sciences demonstrates that positive emotions hold considerable benefits for many factors of fundamental importance for learning, teaching, and employment such as general physical health, cognitive health, and mental health and wellbeing. To support my argument that they should be actively cultivated in learning situations throughout HE, first, I highlight scientific research into the affordances of positive emotions for cognitive health. In this regard, I mention the Higher Education Learning Framework (HELF), a research initiative of the Australian Research Council that was created by synthesising scientific work on effective learning and teaching in HE. I then consider scientific research that is, perhaps, less explored in the context of education. This is the work of Professor Andrew Steptoe and his colleagues from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) project whose research offers helpful data for HE educators regarding the supportive relationship between positive emotions, mental health, and wellbeing. I end with some practical ideas for cultivating positive emotions in teaching situations to stimulate both positive affect and two aspects of cognition that are crucial for learning: attention and memory.

Academic Writing Assessment (AWA) in higher education is essential for students, educators, and institutional stakeholders, as it not only evaluates students’ writing proficiency but also informs pedagogical practices and supports ongoing curriculum development. Despite an expanding body of literature in this domain, comprehensive bibliometric studies that systematically map the publication landscape, identify influential contributors, and trace the evolution of research themes remain scarce. This study addresses this gap by conducting a systematic bibliometric analysis of AWA research in higher education, examining publication trends, thematic development, and key authorship from 2000 to 2025. A total of 545 Scopus-indexed journal articles were analyzed using VOSviewer, Biblioshiny-R, Microsoft Excel, and OpenRefine. The results indicate a consistent growth in publications, particularly after 2010, with a marked surge since 2018. Teng M.F was identified as the most prolific author, offering future researchers clear reference points for seminal works in the field. The most cited publication, Strobl with 212 citations, examined the integration of digital technologies in academic writing. Geographically, the United Kingdom accounted for the highest publication output. Thematic analysis revealed central topics including "academic writing," "higher education," and "assessment," alongside emerging themes such as "collaborative learning," "ChatGPT," "artificial intelligence," and "academic integrity." Current trends suggest that technological integration is reshaping AWA, frequently prioritizing efficiency and measurable outcomes over students’ metacognitive, literacy, critical thinking, and analytical development. These findings highlight the need for more holistic assessment approaches that consider both the processes and outcomes of academic writing. Future research should integrate evaluations of writing processes, learning outcomes, and technological applications to foster a comprehensive understanding of AWA in higher education.

The progress of sustainability within higher education has steadily increased in focus over the last decade and has increasingly become a topic of academic research. As institutions investigate, implement and market sustainability efforts, there is a myriad of sustainability assessment methodologies currently available. This assortment of standards being used by institutions do not help students and faculty assess the level of sustainability uniformly between institutions. A universal framework was proposed for facilitate stakeholder’s review of comparing sustainability assessments in higher education. This research reviews the creation of the framework and results from testing in an online environment. The lack of data collected during the testing phase provides some anecdotal evidence regarding what stakeholder consider important in terms of sustainability within higher education and may also indicate that there is no need for a universal sustainability assessment in higher education to be used directly by stakeholder.

In health-related professions, education has unique challenges. Problem-based learning can be extremely useful and driven by strategies such as group-work (GW) and peer assessment (PA), which are both used as formative and assessment tools. This study aimed to explore experience and perceptions about GW and PA held by educators and students in optometry. In a first survey, 45 Italian educators (43.8 ± 13.0 years old) of optometric clinical modules answered an email questionnaire investigating their attitudes towards GW and PA. In a second survey, 66 3rd-year undergraduates (22.5 ± 2.0 years old) answered a questionnaire investigating the perception and attitudes towards GW and PA at the beginning and at the end of a module of Advanced Optometry structured with a formative/summative GW activity with a final PA. Two-thirds of optometry educators declared they use GW, but not as a summative assessment tool. Only a quarter of the sample answered that they used PA at least once. Educators’ attitudes towards GW were more positive than PA (p < 0.001). About 60% and 80% of the interviewed students stated they have never participated in GW and PA, respectively. Students’ pre-course attitudes towards GW and PA resulted in values close to the middle of the scale with no significant differences and positive correlations between them (p < 0.001). When students’ GW attitudes were compared with educators’ GW attitudes, the latter were more positive. Students’ post-course attitudes towards GW and PA were enhanced. Although GW and PA are considered very good strategies to improve teaching, the results of the present study have demonstrated that the use of these strategies in Italian optometric higher education is limited. However, the study has also demonstrated that Italian optometry educators have positive attitudes towards “social” teaching strategies especially for GW. Furthermore, optometry students showed improved attitudes towards these strategies once exposed to them. Overall, the results of the study open the possibility to integrate “social” teaching strategies to improve the effectiveness of optometry education.

The aim of this study was to test a process model of students’ learning in higher education, linking anxiety, course experience (positive and negative), self-worth protection (SWP) (self-handicapping, defensive expectations, reflectivity), student approach to learning (SAL) (deep/surface), and achievement. Path and bootstrap analyses of data from 899 first-year university students showed that anxiety significantly predicted all SWP strategies and that positive course experience negatively predicted defensive expectations, whereas negative course experience was linked to higher levels of self-handicapping and reflectivity. Deep approach was linked negatively to self-handicapping and positively to reflectivity, whereas surface approach was associated positively with both self-handicapping and defensive expectations. Finally, deep approach positively predicted achievement and partially mediated the effect of self-handicapping on achievement. These findings support the validity of linking SWP with SAL and demonstrate meaningful connections between these and the anxiety and course experience of students. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.