This article is based on research and development carried out at the Centre for
Outcomes-Based Education at the Open University (OU). It explores the way in which higher education (HE) assessment could meet specific criteria in order to assess the unique qualities that underpin the relationship between practitioner-researchers and the workplace. These unique qualities relate to the new knowledge and understanding created from finding solutions to real issues. Evaluation of curriculum developments assessing learning in the workplace at the higher education level suggests that being an experienced and successful practitioner requires both the ability to seek out relevant knowledge and the skills to apply that knowledge in the appropriate way to real situations. HE therefore needs to assess not only cognitive knowledge, but also the social and cultural knowledge that is an essential characteristic of a successful practitioner-researcher. This article sets out the criteria for developing this type of assessment. Social and cultural knowledge has been seen as 'intangible', but it is the position of the authors of this article that developing appropriate assessment must help to reveal this type of knowledge by teasing out how individuals apply them to their working practices. This could fulfil the aim of helping to make these skills more explicit for the individual practitioner and the workplace, while also ensuring that the assessment criteria is appropriate for the purpose of assessing the relationship between the practitioner's knowledge and behaviour in the workplace. Experienced practitioners rely on their experiential learning from past experiences within the culture of their workplace in order to develop new ideas that are successful and relevant to that workplace or sector. Practitioner-researchers therefore display a range of social, cultural and interpersonal skills, as well as a tacit knowledge and understanding of their particular workplace and sector. The workplace sets the scene in which the practitioner needs to operate, and the practitionerresearcher uses a wide range of behaviours to create practical solutions to real problems. Some areas of HE assessment, such as health and social care, have long required articulation with the workplace and cultural norms, and these have evolved to facilitate this interaction of research and practice. It is the spread of this articulation into new areas and across new cultures that presents issues for the development of effective assessment practices that are able to elucidate the full range of knowledge and skills used by practitioner-researchers in the workplace.
This article is based on research and development carried out in the Centre for
Outcomes-Based Education (COBE) at the Open University (OU). The relationship of practitioner-researchers and the workplace has been a focus of work carried out within
COBE over the last six years and forms an important strand of the Centre's involvement in curriculum development across all faculties and disciplines. In the context of this development, 'practice-based learning' has been defined as an active process involving behavioural and emotional engagement with learning as well as cognitive engagement (Hansen, 2000 ).
Our findings suggest that the unique qualities of the new knowledge and understanding created from finding solutions to real issues are important

considerations when designing experiential learning opportunities across the higher education (HE) sector. These unique qualities include the skills that relate to the social, emotional and cultural aspects of successfully operating in different work contexts and situations (Jarvis, 1999 ). When developing assessment strategies that can be applied to the experiences of practitioners, developments within COBE has found that the type of written work traditionally associated with HE assessment may fall short of capturing much of the learning that has occurred through such experiences and, in consequence, may be perceived as being one-dimensional rather than holistic assessment. While our innovative approaches to curriculum design in this area have been taken up successfully by OU faculties within their practice-based learning courses, our evaluation has begun to identify how more effective assessment criteria, directly related to the way practitioner-researchers operate in the workplace, may help
HE deliver more holistic learning opportunities.
In order to fully understand the impact on OU students of assessing practice-based activities and experiences within the workplace, COBE commissioned an evaluation of one of our new curriculum designs for workplace learning. We define 'workplace learning' as learning that is based on students' real practices in the workplace. The workers are practitioner-researchers and students because they are carrying out research based on their practice in their own work situations. Our teaching and learning strategies for workplace learning support students through a range of reflective accounts of their experiences of undertaking practitioner-research activities, such as finding out how policies and procedures affect the way tasks are carried out.
Furthermore, our distance learning pedagogical framework enables students to identify, within their own workplace, a person as their workplace facilitator who provides support in the workplace while the university provides academic tutors to assess students' assignments.
The evaluation was carried out with a cohort of 77 students who registered for the first presentation of an information and communication technology (ICT) focused work-based learning course based on COBE's approach to workplace learning. The aim of the evaluation was to measure the success of this curriculum design in terms of the students' satisfaction with their learning experiences. Student feedback was collected through informal discussions via e-conferencing, a formal student survey and follow-up interviews. The informal discussions with students were undertaken to encourage individuals to express their thoughts freely, along the lines of an ethnographic enquiry. Although only a small number of students participated, a high proportion described having difficulties with the reflective aspects of the learning tasks.
The survey was sent to the 68 students who completed their end-of-course assessment, and 19 responses were received. The survey comprised 17 statements and was designed to collect quantitative data using a Likert 5-point scale (Likert, 1932 ) ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree'. Each statement referred to an

aspect of the students' learning experiences on the course. There was also an opportunity for students to include any feedback that they were not able to give using the formal survey responses. The number of participants who indicated that they had had problems with the reflective aspects of the course was 37% - a significant number. The follow-up interviews with a small number of the participants were used to verify the data and clarify the feedback received in the formal survey. In considering the viewpoints of the students, the key findings of the evaluation highlighted the overall positive feelings expressed by the majority of participants on this type of course. However, it was the few dissenting voices that gave the most valuable feedback because they highlighted the difficulty that practitioners can have in demonstrating, for assessment purposes, the full range of knowledge, behaviours and skills used within their workplace.
In our analysis of the evaluation findings, it became clear that the process of reflection on experience was less than straightforward in that those individuals who struggled with the process of being assessed through written assignments on their workplace experiences expressed viewpoints that ranged from feeling that it was 'too easy' to those who felt it was 'too difficult'. These comments led us to question whether it was those individuals who did not engage strongly enough with the essential process of reflection on practice who felt it was 'too easy', and those individuals who engaged too strongly with this process considered it 'too difficult'. By referring to the engagement of students with the reflection process, we were able to define 'reflection' as more than an academic activity of producing a written account of a given experience. Furthermore, the written reflection did not include the essential qualities of engagement that our students, as practitioner-researchers, had with the workplace.
This led us to consider whether using written reflective accounts to capture the whole range of knowledge, skills and behaviours applied by practitioner-researchers in the workplace was the most appropriate method of assessment. We questioned whether assessing reflection by written accounts was more about the ability to write in an acceptable HE style rather than the actual workplace knowledge used by the practitioner-researcher. Assessment needs to be able to recognise the unique qualities of knowledge created by practitioner-researchers and the behaviours and skills that they use in their relationship with their workplaces.
This finding also had an affect on our own professional practice and highlights a particular benefit of practice-based inquiry in that this type of research enables new insights into what needs to be changed and how change should be made. Having carried out an evaluation into the appropriateness of the methodology used to assess the practitioner-researcher, we are aware of the benefits of developing new approaches based on practice-based research. We have concentrated our further considerations of these issues by exploring more fully how assessment strategies need to recognise the full breadth of knowledge used by practitioner-researchers to create solutions successfully in a range of different contexts and thereby validate that experiential-based knowledge.

Sch n ( 1987 ) put forward the view that experienced practitioners in the workplace have particular skills that enable them to apply their knowledge in a way that leads to the best use of that knowledge. We have found that experienced practitioners are likely to have been undertaking a range of tasks over a number of years based on a sound level of knowledge and understanding. Such knowledge and understanding is used as the basis of seeking out new knowledge by applying practitioners' skills in a relevant way in an actual event or scenario. It should be recognised that these experienced workplace practitioners are already engaged in a learning process through practice by finding out what works best in any given situation. This enables them to develop resolutions for problems that do not necessarily mean they will need to read a book or attend a course (Gibbs & Angelides, 2004 ). Those engaged in practical professions (e.g., electricians and plumbers) regularly need to use their existing knowledge to research into ways of dealing with problems by developing new solutions while carrying out a task (e.g., finding new ways of laying wires or fitting pipes). Similarly, new surgical techniques have been discovered during surgery where experiential learning as well as more academic learning has provided a solution.
Furthermore, law is created during practice in the courtroom where decisions are based upon previous, more academic learning and the facts of a particular situation.
Likewise those designing new curriculum and assessment methodology may develop new approaches based on evaluation of student feedback. All practitioner-researchers, ranging from educationalists to plumbers, develop a unique type of knowledge that would be difficult to assess using the traditional written, reflective account.
Thus practitioner-researchers may acquire and create new knowledge and understanding from their need to address a real and usually immediate issue. As part of this knowledge creation process, they need to use and extend their tacit knowledge of their workplace thereby enabling the knowledge to be embedded into the workplace (Lindley & Wheeler, 2001 ). The tacit knowledge can be construed as knowing how things actually work and happen rather than how any textbook might say that they should happen. Tacit knowledge is often what makes one worker more effective than another and is built up through experience (Gourlay, 2006 ).
Understanding the culture of the work- or life-setting and realising that if one moves to another setting the culture will be different is again something that is learnt through experience. With increasing globalisation, businesses are beginning to realise that even within the same sector of work (e.g., engineering) different cultures develop different social and cultural skills and ways of learning in the workplace (Hampden-
Turner & Trompenaars, 2003 ). Although workplaces may superficially look the same and be engaged in similar activities, there may be a difference in culture, even within the same country, that requires social skills to negotiate, learn about and come to understand.
Tacit knowledge includes social knowledge, emotional intelligence, interpersonal skills and behaviours, and cultural skills. Practitioner-researchers who are successful in the workplace need to display the full range of these behaviours, knowledge and

skills in order to progress their ideas and achieve the most effective solution for the problem they are facing (Sternberg & Horvath, 1999 ). They need to know how to work effectively with others and how to communicate their ideas. Each workplace has its own culture and way of doing things and so those creating new knowledge to meet the needs of practical situations must know how to operate in a range of different contexts and scenarios. Gaining support and backing for innovation is very important because otherwise new ideas will not be taken forward. Thus knowing how to behave and communicate in a range of different contexts are key criteria for those who wish to carry out research and development as part of their practice.
Evidence for the relevance of such knowledge and skills also comes from the British
Chambers of Commerce that represents many employers in the United Kingdom. This organisation has commented on the importance of the workforce having softer skills such as communication, teamwork and time-keeping in order for employers to be successful and profitable. Furthermore, Barrie ( 2004 ) refers to the necessity for graduates to be able to communicate, have social and professional understanding as well as a personal and intellectual autonomy, which might be described as being able to work independently in other contexts. These skills have been given many collective labels, but are often referred to as 'generic and transferable skills'. Although generic and transferable skills can be viewed as being crucially important in an ever-changing world of work, if HE is to be successful in providing meaningful opportunities, then the assessment of practitioner-researchers in the workplace must recognise the significance of social, cultural and interpersonal skills that are specific to a workplace industry or sector. For example, the Institute of Engineering and Technology (see http://www.theiet.org/ ) requires all members to have qualifications in the field of engineering that, particularly City and Guilds qualifications (see http://www.city-andguilds.co.uk/cps/rde/xchg/cgonline ), require workplace assessment of some of the social and interpersonal behaviours, knowledge and skills highlighted in this article.
In seeking to find a more holistic approach to assessment so that the process of applying knowledge can be considered and evaluated (Biggs, 2003 ), we have first explored current practices.
Current assessment practices often fail to relate to the manner in which most developments happen within the workplace because they tend to rely heavily on accepted norms of HE assessment - namely, a reflective, written account of the individual's experience of learning in the workplace. There has been much exploration of different methods of assessment (Trotter, 2006 ). Methodologies such as a viva and professional discussion are already accepted by the HE establishment. However, there are a number of reasons why these are not seen as valid for vocational courses, not least the push from university policies and procedures to have assessment practices that are standardised, statistically reliable and valid. While written assignments give students the opportunity to reflect upon, analyse and synthesise the knowledge they have acquired in practical situations, this type of assessment strategy is unable to assess the range of social, interpersonal and cultural life skills involved in the practical application and creation of knowledge. Although we have found that the inclusion of some form of practice-based learning experience in undergraduate study

has increased over the last six years following the introduction of the foundation degrees award (HEFCE, 2000 ), there is still some way to go before this type of learning is viewed as legitimately sitting within HE programmes. While disciplines such as health and education recognise practice-based learning outcomes, this is not the case for disciplines such as mathematics and history, which are traditionally taught as theoretical, academic disciplines. The recent Leitch report (Leitch, 2006 ) refers back to the Tomlinson report (Tomlinson, 2004 ) that advocates equality of status for vocational and academic learning, which would suggest that there has been very little advance of the status of vocational learning in HE between these two reports.
David Starr-Glass ( 2002 ) suggests that there is a need for a new approach that sets the student firmly in the centre of the learning process and that, rather than using HE as the benchmark for the student's practice-based learning, HE should be mapped against the practice-based learning thus giving more weight to the individual's own learning journey. There is also an issue about the amount of assessment expected within HE for all types of learning, including content-driven courses based on academic theory and practice-based learning where the learner brings in his or her own experiences for accreditation. Assessment is required to prove to the appropriate external bodies, and employers, that the necessary quality assurance standards for HE are being met.
However, assessment may also be seen as a constraint inhibiting the recognition of individual learning achievements (Linkon, 2005 ) due to the volume of work deemed necessary. For example, it is debateable whether large word counts equal quality content. Workplaces often employ short report formats or diagrams to convey ideas and these types of documents could be used within assignments. A holistic view of knowledge gained and assessed that cannot be compartmentalised and needs to be assessed in context (Boud, 2000 ) presents challenges for traditional methodologies of assessment. Based on this proposition, assessment of practitioner-researchers cannot be carried out in absentia of the workplace in which the practitioner is based, and whatever is proposed as an alternative strategy will need to take account of both quality assurance and financial constraints. This sustainable assessment for lifelong learning and from life experience needs new and fresh approaches.
Our findings from our own practitioner-research suggest that different assessment strategies and pedagogies more akin to workplace practice are needed if HE is to be able to assess accurately the relationship between the practitioner-researcher and the workplace. Some education and training providers have attempted to assess social, cultural and interpersonal skills in their courses. For example, in the case of the
National Vocation Qualifications NVQs system, this is done via a series of competencies; however, this system is concerned with the achievement of goals rather than a consideration and reflection upon the manner in which such goals might be approached. For instance, NVQ Administration Level 3 has the competency of
'Maintain effective working relationships'. It then breaks this down into such key points as 'How to negotiate effectively with other people'. It does not ask for a

reflective account of the aspects of the person, or persons, with whom one is negotiating or in what way 'effective working relationships' are usually conducted within that workplace. This deeper social and cultural knowledge and understanding is not elucidated from a list of competencies. There is no evidence of the HE levels of reflection, analysis and synthesis of knowledge and understanding. Even at the HE level, a list of competencies will not address these issues. Rather a set of criteria containing these elements as starting points for assessment could address assessment of this broader range of skills and knowledge.
Training in the workplace via such methods as apprenticeships has a long tradition of passing this knowledge on alongside measurable competencies. However, as Halliday
( 2004 ) argues, any assessments of these types of knowledge have to take into account the context and culture in which that knowledge resides. The key skills ideals of measuring communication and interpersonal skills outside of contextual considerations are not an answer, as in absentia of the culture of the workplace or context. What is assessed as appropriate in the classroom of a further education college or shown in an essay sent to a university tutor may not reflect what happens in real places and situations. If one accepts Beyer's and Trice ( 1984 ) contention that culture consists of the networks of meaning that convey ideologies, norms and values, and the practices that affirm these, then it is obvious that those of the workplace are liable to differ from those of an educational establishment. Indeed, it is obvious that the culture of one business type is liable to differ from another type, for example, a heavy engineering plant contrasted with an architectural design office. Thus these intangible skills and knowledge need to be assessed within a specific context or culture.
The way that practitioner-researchers relate to their workplaces and the way that they apply and create knowledge using a range of skills and behaviours has been explored by a number of researchers including Billett ( 2000 ), Fenwick ( 2001 ) and Bordum
( 2002 ). While it is acknowledged that social, cultural and interpersonal behaviours are relevant issues that influence practitioners in the workplace, the interplay between them and the way that practitioners apply them to each workplace situation has led to them being described as intangible (i.e., indefinable). For assessment purposes, this is not helpful. If these intangible skills are an essential aspect of the relationship between practitioners and the workplace, then we pose the question: Is there some way in which assessment methodology can help display these skills without losing sight of the complexities and nuances involved? Table 1 sets out a range of cognitive, social and cultural knowledge demonstrated by practitioner-researchers in the workplace and attempts to relate them to a range of assessment criteria. We would suggest that while this is not a definitive list, these criteria follow a logical order that could then become an iterative cycle.
Table 1. Criteria for assessing practitioner-researchers in the workplace
Practitioner-researchers actions Criteria for assessment
Recognising an issue or a potential problem
Understanding of environment or sector
Where to get additional information
Finding out what, why and how
Developing ideas
Workplace and sector knowledge
Evidence of practice
Creativity

Table 1. Criteria for assessing practitioner-researchers in the workplace
Practitioner-researchers actions Criteria for assessment
Making decisions based on prior knowledge Sound judgement
Understanding others roles and constraints
Workplace interpersonal skills; workplace knowledge
Where to get additional input or help
Finding solutions
Ability to pass on the knowledge in writing, diagrammatically or orally
Influencing skills
Problem solving
Information conveying skills
If different criteria are to be used for assessment of this type of knowledge, then new methodologies need to be developed. In exploring a range of assessment options we considered whether any of them would have made the assessment for those in our evaluation study 'just right' instead of 'too difficult' or 'too easy'. There have been some attempts to include some aspects of these assessment criteria in previous assessment strategies (e.g., in the case of peer- and self-assessment; see Brown et al.
,
1994 ; Topping, 1998 ; Orsmond et al.
, 2000 ). These strategies focus on the way students actively need to engage in the assessment process when they are asked to assess themselves or their fellow students. These strategies are therefore seen as important ways of assessing the judgement necessary to be successful in the workplace. However, the use of these assessment strategies has not been widely applied due in part to students expressing concerns about the lack of quality assurance in this system. In other words, students have concerns that in being assessed by their peers there will be too much variability between the assessors, possibly resulting in grades that are not comparable with those attaining the same qualification in another institution. This may be overcome if peer assessment is used for formative, ungraded assessment as suggested by Eadie ( 2004 ).
Another difficulty is associated with the reaction of students who may become stressed about taking part in peer- and self-assessment. Stress may be detrimental to students' learning or, as is suggested by Pope ( 2005 ), it may in fact lead to improved performance for some individuals. Other considerations include such issues as gender bias (i.e., do males and females favour students of their own gender?); what part of the course the assessment is undertaken (i.e., whether students are new or experienced); and the motivations of peer markers (i.e., are students being subjective or objective?) (Langan et al.
, 2005 ). Nevertheless, assessment by peers has been found to offer a positive way of demonstrating higher level skills and abilities that meets both professional and educational standards. Peer-assessment and selfassessment have also been identified as being useful in relation to the ways in which development of the professional is achieved (Burton, 2005 ).
Group project work is another assessment strategy with a range of benefits, not least the demonstration of working in teams and effective communication. Nevertheless, this form of assessment is also not without its difficulties such as students who do not

participate fully in the group (Mills, 2003 ). This gives rise to issues surrounding the fulfilment of learning outcomes and assessment criteria by all of the students within the group.
Professional discussion is much used in the fields of social work and health care as a tool for assessment and review of practitioners. It is usually done on a one-to-one basis and more frequently than a traditional HE viva . Concerns around this methodology include potential prejudice on the behalf of the assessor and issues relating to quality assurance procedures. It has also to be stressed that the assessor must be an expert in the field in which he or she is assessing.
There are also new and innovative developments such as the 'Patchwork Text'
(Winter, 2003 ), which uses several small pieces of work that are first peer and/or tutor reviewed and then assembled into an end-of-course piece of work. This work consists of the smaller pieces linked with a commentary, and they may be revised in the light of comments. However, students in the field of work-based learning are often geographically dispersed and studying in disparate environments, from a construction site to an accountant's office, and therefore such close cooperation becomes logistically difficult as matching workplace types and locations could be hard.
Assessment by project work is also commonplace, but the nature and length of the project and its realistic relationship to the requirements of workplace need to be taken into consideration. To write a project brief that covers a variety of workplaces and yet assesses the same learning outcomes without it becoming so generic as to be meaningless is not straightforward. It must also be said that projects are expensive and time-consuming to assess and require an understanding of the culture of the workplace within which they were carried out.
For all of these assessment methodologies, there are issues of quality assurance, personality and agendas, and cost effectiveness. For the practitioner-researcher, however, the important issue is whether or not they enhance their relationship with the workplace. The danger of the inclusion of personalities in these assessment methods is that if they are critical of the workplace this may harm their relations with their work colleagues. We would argue that methodologies that are more compatible with usual workplace practice such as short reports, diagrammatic representation, video or audio or verbatim reports would be more appropriate to the criteria we have proposed.
These methodologies should be chosen because, as far as the practitioner is concerned, these are more appropriate to convey a particular piece of learning or demonstrate a model of behaviour.
During our curriculum development we have found that assessment has more meaning if it is relevant to the individual's own context and 'fit for purpose', by which we mean it assesses the unique qualities of practitioner knowledge rather than just the skills displayed by written reflective accounts. In other words, practitioner-researchers need to be assessed on the basis that they are fully engaged in creating solutions to

problems and as such are able to create and apply new 'theories' or ideas. However, this new knowledge is often intangible and is often not recognised in terms of individual attainment or in terms of organisational benefits. HE can play a part in making these types of knowledge creation activities more accessible through appropriate assessment and accreditation of practice-based learning. By developing assessment practices that involve the learner (Pekrun et al.
, 2002 ), successful practitioner-researchers can enhance their performance by also gaining HE skills such as critical analysis and synthesis. Thus by involving the practitioner in assessment, it enables the full range of skills to be demonstrated and helps the individual develop their own critical faculties so that they can gain higher achievements in their workplace.
Research and development at the OU has highlighted the role that HE has in developing new assessment strategies that recognise the social and cultural, as well as the cognitive, knowledge employed by successful practitioner-researchers. We have argued that new criteria and methodologies are needed to assess such learning or previously learnt knowledge. This knowledge is more than a list of competencies and is finely nuanced, complex and often discrete for each sector. From a practitioner's viewpoint, many qualifications that they currently undertake ignore this type of knowledge, which is an essential part of the way they perform their research and work in the workplace. From the employer and workplace viewpoint, this knowledge is hard to pin down, quantify, reward adequately or advertise for in personnel.
Given the increasing importance of HE to the British economy, it is important that it elucidates those qualities that go beyond competencies to include the knowledge and understanding developed within a workplace situation as well as theoretical knowledge. This was demonstrated by Bill Rammell's speech to the conference on
'HEFCE & Leadership Foundation for HE: Sustaining Excellence in HE' in January
2007 where he stated: 'The UK's HE sector is one of our greatest strengths in this fight. It's a major contributor to our economic success and social well-being, as a country. A national asset, whose excellence in teaching and research is recognised around the world.' In this way, the relationship between employers and practitionerresearchers is enhanced by a mutual understanding and recognition of the added value of a practitioner-researcher who takes their workplace role and accesses the theory behind the everyday activities, thus enabling them to enhance practice in the workplace. The challenge for HE is how to achieve this. We have argued that while current assessment practice is not the answer, HE has the capacity and knowledge to expand the way certain areas tackle assessment into the wider vocational field. It requires a daring rethink of assessment norms that go beyond theories and competencies to developing new ways to assess social, cultural and cognitive knowledge.

 1. Barrie, S. C. (2004) A research-based approach to generic graduates attributes policy. Higher Education Research and Development 23 :(3) , pp.
261-275. [informaworld]
 2. Beyer, J. and Trice, H. (1984) Studying organisational cultures through rites and ceremonials. Academy of Management Review 9 :(4) , pp. 653-669. [ crossref ]
 3. Biggs, J. (2003) Aligning teaching and assessing to course objectives. paper
 presented at , University of Aveiro — Available online at: http://event.ua.pt/iched/
4. Billett, S. Symes, C. (ed) (2000) Co-participation at work: Knowing and working knowledge. Working knowledge: Productive learning at work Sydney
University of Technology , Sydney — (ED 451 388). Available online at: http://www.governance.com.au/rav/workingknowledge.htm
(accessed 30
January 2007)
 5. Bordum, A. (2002) From tacit knowing to tacit knowledge: Emancipation or ideology?. Critical Quarterly 44 :(3) , pp. 50-54.
 6. Boud, D. (2000) Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the

 learning society. Studies in Continuing Education 22 :(2) , pp. 151-167.
[informaworld]
7. Brown, S. , Rust, C. and Gibbs, G. (1994) Strategies for diversifying assessment in higher education Oxford Centre for Staff Development , Oxford
[informaworld]
8. Burton, J. (2005) Self-assessment, peer assessment and third party assessment: Significance for work-based learning. Work-Based Learning in


Primary Care 3 , pp. 1-3.
9. City and Guilds website: http://www.city-andguilds.co.uk/cps/rde/xchg/cgonline (accessed 30 January 2007)
10. Eadie, A. (2004) Using assessment to motivate learning: Post-workshop report — ('Using Assessment to Motivate Learning' workshop, Glasgow).
Available online at: http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/ (accessed 30
January 2007)


11. Fenwick, T. (2001) Work knowing 'on the fly': Enterprise cultures and coemergent epistemology. Studies in Continuing Education 23 :(2) , pp. 243-259.
[informaworld]
12. Gibbs, P. and Angelides, P. (2004) Accreditation of knowledge as being-

 in-the-world. Journal of Education and Work 17 :(3) , pp. 333-346.
[informaworld]
13. Gourlay, S. (2006) Towards conceptual clarity for 'tacit knowledge': A review of empirical studies. Knowledge Management Research and Practice
4 :(1) , pp. 60-69. [ crossref ]
 14. Halliday, J. (2004) Competence in the workplace: Rhetorical robbery and curriculum policy. Educational Philosophy and Theory 36 :(5) , pp. 579-590. [ crossref ]
 15. Hampden-Turner, C. and Trompenaars, F. (2003) Riding the waves of culture Nicholas Brealey , London
16. Hansen, R. (2000) The role of experience learning: Giving meaning and authenticity to the learning process. Journal of Technology Education 11 :(2)
— Available online at: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v11n2/Hansen.html
(accessed 30
January 2007)



17. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) (2000)
Foundation degree prospectus HEFCE , London
18. Institute of Engineering and Technology website: http://www.theiet.org/
(accessed 30 January 2007)
 19. Jarvis, P. (1999) The practitioner-researcher: Developing theory from practice Jossey-Bass , San Francisco, CA
 20. Langan, A. et al. (2005) Peer assessment of oral presentations: Effects of student gender, university affiliation and participation in the development of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30 :(1) , pp.
21-34. [informaworld]
 21. Lindley, E. and Wheeler, F. (2001) Using the learning square. Learning

Organisations 8 :(3) , pp. 114-124. [ crossref ]
22. Linkon, S. (2005) How can assessment work for us?. Academe 91 , pp. 22-
32.


23. Leitch, S. (2006) Prosperity for all in the global economy: World class skills — Available online at: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/leitch (accessed
30 January 2007)
24. Likert, R. (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of


Psychology 140 , p. 55.
25. Mills, P. (2003) Group project work with undergraduate veterinary science students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 28 :(5) , pp. 527-538.
[informaworld]
26. Orsmond, P. , Merry, S. and Rieling, K. (2000) The use of student-derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in


Higher Education 25 :(1) , pp. 23-38. [informaworld]
27. Pekrun, R. , Goetz, T. , Titz, W. and Perry, R. (2002) Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist 37 :(2) , pp. 91-105.
28. Pope, N. (2005) The impact of stress in self- and peer assessment.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30 :(1) , pp. 51-63.
[informaworld]


29. Sternberg, R. and Horvath, J. (eds) (1999) Tacit knowledge in professional practice: Researcher and practitioner perspectives Lawrence Erlbaum ,
Mahway, NJ
30. Sch n, D. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner Jossey-Bass , San
Francisco, CA
 31. Starr-Glass, D. (2002) Metaphor and totem: Exploring and evaluating prior experiential learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27 :(3) ,
 pp. 221-231. [informaworld]
32. Topping, K. (1998) Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 68 :(3) , pp. 249-276. [ crossref ]
 33. Tomlinson, M. (2004) 14-19 curriculum and qualifications reform —
Available online at: www.14-19reform.gov.uk
(accessed 30 January 2007)
 34. Trotter, E. (2006) Student perceptions of continuous summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 31 :(5) , pp. 501-
521. [informaworld]