An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and Learning of Commerce at Ordinary level: A Case Study of Five (5) Secondary Schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe South District, Midlands, Zimbabwe.

Dynamic Research Journals (DRJ)
Journal of Economics and Finance (DRJ-JEF)

Volume 2 ~ Issue 6 (June, 2017) pp: 01-19
ISSN (Online); 2520-7490
www.dynamicresearchjournals.org
An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and

Learning of Commerce at Ordinary level: A Case Study of Five
(5) Secondary Schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe
South District, Midlands, Zimbabwe
1Qedisani Masayile, 2Thabani Nyoni, 3Munyaradzi Nyoni, 4Wellington G. Bonga and
5Bliss J. Musisinyani
Corresponding Author: Mr. Q. Masayile- masayile.q@gmail.com
Abstract: This research is an exploratory study on the use of marking schemes in five secondary schools in
Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe South District. The purpose of the research is to evaluate the use of
marking schemes in the teaching and learning of Commerce at Ordinary level with particular emphasis on
effectiveness, challenges and student and teacher perceptions on their use. The research adopted qualitative
research design and thus employed a case study approach. Data was gathered from 10 Commerce teachers and
120 Ordinary level Commerce students from the five secondary schools using questionnaires, interviews and
observations. Data was analysed using appropriate quantitative and qualitative techniques which include
graphs, pie charts and tables. The responses highlight the ways in which students and teachers use marking
schemes and the benefits the use of marking schemes have on learning and the classroom. Students and teachers
reported that marking schemes were useful throughout the process of teaching and completing assignments, and
responses indicated areas in which the many uses of marking schemes could be emphasized during instruction
to maximize utility. Students also highlighted that by creating a more specific and open assessment tool, they felt
an increased ability to communicate questions and ideas regarding assignments. However, the frequency of use
of marking schemes by teachers, despite the numerous reported merits, is disappointingly low because of issues
like shortage of time, non-alignment of syllabi goals with assessment goals, and challenges in designing them.
Amongst other recommendations, the study also emphasizes on the need for the internalization of, and induction
of students to the use of marking schemes.
Keywords: Academic Performance, Assessment of Students, Evaluating Students, Learning in Commerce,
Marking Schemes, Syllabus, Teaching in Commerce, Zimbabwe
JEL Codes: A21, C10, C38, H52, I21, I28, O15, P36, P46
I.INTRODUCTION
A teacher who gives students a practical test, assignment, revision exercise, month-end test and or any
end of term examination without supplying a marking guide or marking scheme is just an experienced pilot who
does not follow a campus; and the obvious destiny is demise. Assessment and evaluation are essential
components of teaching and learning in Commerce. Without an effective evaluation program it is impossible to
know whether students have learned, whether teaching has been effective, or how best to address student
learning needs. The quality of the assessment and evaluation in the educational process has a profound and well-
established link to student performance. Research consistently shows that regular monitoring and feedback are
essential to improving student learning. What is assessed and evaluated, how it is assessed and evaluated, and
how results are communicated sends clear messages to students and others about what is really valuedwhat is
worth learning, how it should be learned, what elements of quality are most important, and how well students
are expected to perform.
1.1 Background of Study

Assessment or marking of pupils work should be based on a criterion referenced framework, which
means assessment will be made on the basis of performance defined by pre-specified criteria, rather than norm-
referenced approaches where assessment is made on the basis of performance relative to that of other members
of the class or cohort. In criterion referenced assessment, practices such as scaling marks and grading students to
fit a normal distribution curve are not appropriate. A criterion-referenced measure is targeted at the criteria
specified in the learning outcome. Criterion-referenced measures require learners to demonstrate presence of
www.dynamicresearchjournals.org 1|Page
An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and Learning of Commerce at Ordinary level: A Case Study of
Five (5) Secondary Schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe South District, Midlands, Zimbabwe
learned capabilities in relation to specified criteria. Criteria referenced assessment involve the use of marking
schemes. A norm-referenced measure compares a learners performance against that of other learners in the
cohort (Naidu, 2006). This form of assessment rates student performance against the normal distribution of
abilities in the population (a few excellent students, some good students, and the majority are average students).
High quality assessment and evaluation of any performance depends on accurate and reliable measurement of
key performance factors. Low-level understanding is conveniently investigated with the help of simple,
quantitative tools, such as multiple-choice tests, true-false quizzes, and vocabulary definitions. On the other
hand, systems thinking, procedural knowledge, and attitude formation require more sophisticated measurement
schemes. By explicitly stating significant performance criteria, marking schemes classify and organize
performance observations with respect to different skill levels, behaviours, and/or product quality.
Measuring a performance, a work product, or a learning skill can prove to be challenging without the
appropriate measurement tool. Marking schemes are tools that can help multiple instructors come to similar
conclusions about construction of higher-level conceptual knowledge, performance skills, and attitudes. Basic
facts and concepts, also referred to as declarative knowledge (Angelo, 2002; Bloom, 1956, Anderson and
Krathwohl, 2001), can be measured with selected-response methods. However, higher order thinking,
procedural knowledge, and enduring understanding require more open-ended, complex and authentic types of
assessment and evaluation (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998; Angelo, 2002). Assessments and evaluations that
require students to construct knowledge (called constructed response) cannot be scored easily with an answer
key. Marking schemes are designed to help teachers measure ability to use and apply factual, conceptual,
procedural and metacognitive knowledge (Angelo, 2002; Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001; Bloom, 1956). For
example, if a teacher wants to measure the ability to use a mathematics formula to solve an accounting problem,
the quality of a dance performance, or an attitude as reflected in essay, a rubric can help make the measurement
more objective and meaningful.
Marking schemes are guidelines that enable the assessment process of communicating expectations;
providing focused on-going feedback; and grading (Andrade & Du, 2005; Moskal, 2000; Isaacs, 2001; Holmes
& Smith, 2003). Andrade & Du, (2005) defined a rubric (marking scheme/guide) as a document that articulates
the expectations for an assignment by listing the criteria, or what counts and describing levels of quality from
excellent to poor. Apart from being considered as an effective tool for measuring, evaluating and reporting
student achievement, marking schemes are also designed to guide students learning, teachers instruction,
course development and administrators program observations (Glickman-Bond & Rose, 2006). Marking
schemes therefore are held as being direct assessment measures which help to answer the key questions driving
outcomes assessment, i.e. how students learn; what students learn; how is student learning assessed; and how are
assessment results used (Glenn, 2005).
Therefore, in light of the foregoing, assessment of student learning using marking schemes or marking
guides (rubrics) can be termed a change process, requiring considerable teacher involvement in terms of both
time and effort. Investigation and evaluation of its usefulness and effectiveness to the primary stakeholders in an
educational institution, namely teachers and students, is therefore an immediate necessity.
1.2 Statement of the problem

The five secondary schools (Choto Tafara, Marimasimbe, Maboke, Marirangwe and Chitombo) chosen
for the study have, for the past five years, recorded mediocre Ordinary level pass rates in Commerce both from
local (district) examinations and public (Zimbabwe School Examinations Council) examinations, not exceeding
60%, despite the fact that, as already noted by Nyoni et al (2017); there have been qualified teachers and low
staff turnover. Learners have often reported uncertainty about exactly what is required of them in assessment
and, most importantly, they have been observed to encounter difficulty in appreciating the difference between a
first class answer and a third, often thinking it is all about effort. Therefore, the study sought to evaluate the use
(by teachers and learners) and effectiveness of marking schemes as aids to teaching and learning, and how they
can be fully harnessed for improved academic achievements and performances by learners at Ordinary level.
1.3 Research question(s)

The proposed study addresses the following questions:
i. Do teachers use marking schemes in their teaching of Commerce?
ii. Are ordinary level students conversant of the assessment criteria used in grading their performances both
internally and externally?
iii. What are the effects of using marking schemes in teaching Commerce?
iv. What are the main challenges in the design and use of marking schemes faced by teachers and students?
v. How do teachers and students perceive marking schemes visa vie academic performance?
1.4 Objectives
The main objectives of the study were to:
i. Establish whether Commerce teachers and learners effectively use marking schemes in their teaching
and learning.
ii. Establish the problems faced by teachers in designing marking schemes and propose solutions to the
problems.
iii. Analyze the problems faced by both teachers and learners in using marking schemes.
iv. Analyze teachers and learners perceptions towards the use of marking schemes to improve the
academic achievements and performances of learners.
1.5 Research Significance

The study has the potential to act as a handy manual for effective use of marking schemes as a teaching
and assessment tool to improve the academic achievements of pupils at Ordinary level, Commerce as well as
other subjects. This will help secondary school teachers as well by improving their teaching strategies in relation
to marking schemes. It was the researchers intention that the findings of this research could also be applied to
other disciplines to achieve good results.
1.6 Definition of terms

Operational definitions of the key terms are given to avoid implied universal meanings that may not be
in conformity with this study. It is also hoped that they will help the reader to be on the same wavelength with
the study.
Assessment: according to McCulloch (2007) the term assessment is derived from ad sedere to sit down
beside. The implication of the etymology is that it is primarily concerned with providing guidance and feedback
to the learner. It is a sample of student performance or behavior used to obtain information or provide feedback
about learning targets in order to make decisions and take action about individual students, groups of students,
and instruction, programs, or schools (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 1999, online).
Assessment is the process of gathering, recording, interpreting, using, and reporting information about a childs
progress and achievement in developing knowledge, skills and attitudes.
Formative assessment: . is a part of the instructional process, used by teachers and students during
instruction that provides feedback to adjust ongoing teaching and learning to improve students achievement of
intended instructional outcomes (FAST SCASS, 2006). It is work (such as course work assignments) which
counts towards the students mark or grade for the course, and which is returned to the student within a few
days, with feedback in terms of symbols, comments and a mark or grade.
Semi-formative assessment: written tasks closely modeled on those in the final examination and marked
according to assessment criteria set out in the course description. The way the practice piece is marked (how
these criteria are applied, the symbols used, the comments provided) provides guidance to students as to how the
corresponding task in the final examination will be assessed.
Summative assessment: Assessment which provides overall evidence of the achievement of students and of
what they know, understand and can do, by assigning a value to what the student achieves. (McCulloch, 2007)
These are used to evaluate student learning at the end of an instructional period. Summative assessment helps
determine to what extent the instructional and learning goals have been met.
Criterion - Referencing: A system of assessment where achievements are judged in relation to objectives or
criteria irrespective of other students performance.
Norm Referencing: A system of assessment by which students are placed in rank order, where grades are
assigned by comparison to other students performance rather than upon the absolute quality of their
performance.
Marking scheme: Bloxham & Boyd (2007) refer to a marking scheme as a matrix-based instrument that
applies grade descriptors according to the level of achievement against specific assessment criteria for an
assignment. Mark schemes are the instructional documents that show examiners how to mark a specific exam
paper. They include the answers that examiners are looking for and they also specify how marks must be
awarded when answers are only partly correct. They are carefully reviewed and revised for clarity and factual
accuracy before an exam.
Marking guide: is an advanced grading method that allows instructors to articulate expectations for an
assignment by listing the criteria, or what counts, and assigning points based on a students level of
achievement regarding that criteria.
Rubric: The word rubric comes from the Latin word for red. The online Merriam-Webster dictionary lists the
first meaning of rubric as an authoritative rule and the fourth meaning as a guide listing specific criteria for
grading or scoring academic papers, projects, or tests. A rubric is a coherent set of criteria for students work
that includes descriptions of levels of performance quality on the criteria (Brookhart, 2013). A well-done rubric
is both an instructional tool and an assessment mechanism.
However, it is imperative to note that the terms marking scheme, marking guide and rubric can be used
interchangeably as they all refer to the same thing (i.e. a list of specific criteria that is used when marking
students work with a view of determining their levels of performances or achievement academically) but differ
in the wording of their definitions only. Therefore, for consistency and to avoid confusion, the term marking
scheme is going to be used throughout this research to refer to all three.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Literature Review

2.1.1 Marking Schemes in Teaching & Learning (Overview).
According to Dunn et al (2004), if assessment defines the curriculum, so marking schemes define
assessment. Marking schemes play an important role in criterion referenced assessments and many institutions
of learning insist on their use. They explicitly explain how a student is graded and every mark is accounted for.
This helps the students to recognize and match teachers expectations and encourages student autonomy
(Ramsden, 2000) by promoting deep learning. students are able to evaluate themselves and it also aids peer
evaluation as teachers can account for very mark the student has gained or lost it build student confidence in the
assessor and assessment system. For institutions a major advantage of using marking schemes is that they help
standardize grading. Different teachers assessing with the same marking criteria, it was found, grade students
similarly (Brew, 2003). Marking scheme increases the validity and reliability of assessments. The use of
marking schemes helps teachers to give meaningful feedback to students.
2.1.2 What are the effects of using marking schemes in teaching and learning?
Marking schemes can contribute positive or negative effects to student learning and program
improvement in a number of ways some obvious, others less so. Marking schemes make the learning target
clearer. If students know what the learning target is, they are better able to hit it (Stiggins, 2001). When giving
students a complex task to complete, such as a building an architectural model or putting together a portfolio of
their business investments, students who know in advance what the criteria are for assessing their performance
will be better able to construct models or select investments that demonstrate their skills in those areas.
Marking schemes are important in that they give structure to observations. As a teacher matching your
observations of a student's work to the descriptions in the marking scheme averts the rush to judgment that can
occur in classroom evaluation situations. Instead of judging the performance, the marking scheme describes the
performance. The resulting judgment of quality based on a marking scheme therefore also contains within it a
description of performance that can be used for feedback and teaching. This is different from a judgment of
quality from a score or a grade arrived at without a marking scheme. Judgments without descriptions stop the
action in a classroom.
Marking schemes guide instructional design and delivery. When teachers have carefully articulated
their expectations for student learning in the form of a marking scheme, they are better able to keep the key
learning targets front and centre as they choose instructional approaches and design learning environments that
enable students to achieve these outcomes (Arter & McTigue, 2001).
According to Wolf & Stevens, (2007) marking schemes add value to marking in that they make the
assessment process more accurate and fair. By referring to a common marking scheme in reviewing each student
product or performance, a teacher is more likely to be consistent in his or her judgments. A marking scheme
helps to anchor judgments because it continually draws the reviewers attention to each of the key criteria so
that the teacher is less likely to vary her application of the criteria from student to student. Furthermore, when
there are multiple markers (e.g. ZIMSEC examinations that use multiple teachers as graders), the consistency
across these markers is likely to be higher when they are all drawing on the same detailed performance criteria.
Additionally, a more prosaic benefit is the decided decrease in student complaints about grades at terms end.
Wolf & Stevens, (2007) postulated that marking schemes provide students with a tool for self-
assessment and peer feedback. Hafner & Hafner, (2004) in Wolf and Stevens, (2007) further explained that
when students have the assessment criteria in hand as they are completing a task, they are better able to critique
their own performances. A hallmark of a professional is the ability to accurately and insightfully assess ones
own work. In addition, marking guides/schemes can also be used by classmates to give each other specific
feedback on their performances. Marking schemes are great for students: they let students know what is
expected of them, and demystify grades by clearly stating the expectations for a particular essay(s), exam
question(s) or project(s). They also help students see that learning is about gaining specific skills (both in
academic subjects and in problem-solving and life skills), and they give students the opportunity to do self-
assessment to reflect on the learning process. When students are involved in the creation of a marking
guide/scheme they have a say in what they believe to be the most important aspects of the task; this can help
with student motivation and investment. For both psychometric and pedagogical reasons, Wolf & Stevens
(2007) recommend that peers give only formative feedback that is used to help the learner make improvements
in the product or performance, and not give ratings that are factored into a students grade.
Marking schemes have the potential to advance the learning of students of colour, first generation
students, and those from non-traditional settings. An often unrecognized benefit of marking schemes is that they
can make learning expectations or assumptions about the tasks themselves more explicit (Andrade & Ying,
2005). In academic environments we often operate on unstated cultural assumptions about the expectations for
student performance and behaviour and presume that all students share those same understandings. However,
research by Lisa Delpit (1988) & Shirley Heath (1983), for example, highlights the many ways that expectations
in schools are communicated through subtle and sometimes unrecognizable ways for students of colour or non -
native English speakers who may have been raised with a different (but valid) set of rules and assumptions
about language, communication, and school performance itself.
While well- designed marking schemes make the assessment process more valid and reliable, their real
value lies in advancing the teaching and learning process. But having a marking scheme doesnt necessarily
mean that the evaluation task is simple or clear- cut. The best marking schemes allow evaluators and teachers to
draw on their professional knowledge and to use that professional knowledge in ways that the rating process
doesnt fall victim to personality variations or limitations of human information processing.
Dunn et al (2004) as cited in Koshy, (2008) opinionated that marking schemes make teachers
vulnerable as students find it easier to challenge grading decisions. They further clarified that criterion
referenced assessment in general is criticized as being reductionist or aiding in spoon feeding students,
simplifying complex professional judgments to lower-order tasks. In light of this Koshy, (2008) postulates that
developing good criteria or marking schemes where students will learn the curriculum while preparing for the
assessments is therefore essential. The basic principle of good assessment, then, is to ensure that the assessment
is aligned to the curriculum.
Wolf & Stevens, (2007) submit that another serious concern with marking schemes is how long it takes
to create them, especially writing the descriptions of performances at each level. It becomes a tiresome
responsibility if teachers are to create marking schemes for every task given to the students therefore they
should be developed for only the most important and complex assignments. Creating a marking scheme that is
used to determine whether students can name all the retailers in Zimbabwe would be like using a scalpel to cut
down a tree: Good instrument, wrong application.
Another challenge with marking schemes is that if poorly designed they can actually diminish the
learning process. Wolf & Stevens (2007) submit that marking schemes can act as a straitjacket, preventing
creations other than those envisioned by the marking scheme- maker from unfolding. (If it is not on the
marking scheme, it must not be important or possible.) The challenge then is to create a marking scheme that
makes clear what is valued in the performance or product without constraining or diminishing them. On the
other hand, the problem with having no marking scheme, or one that is so broad that it is meaningless, is to risk
having an evaluation process that is based on individual whimsy or worse unrecognized prejudices. Marking
scheme makers face serious challenges in trying to design a marking scheme that is neither too narrow nor too
broad.
While not a panacea, the benefits of marking schemes are manythey can advance student learning,
support instruction, strengthen assessment, and improve program quality.
2.1.3 What are the main challenges in the design and use of marking schemes faced by teachers and
students?
The language used in marking schemes is considered to be one of the most challenging aspects of its
design (Tierney and Simon 2004; Moni, Beswick, and Moni 2005). As with any form of assessment, the clarity
of the language in a marking scheme is a matter of validity, because an ambiguous marking scheme cannot be
accurately or consistently interpreted by instructors, students or scorers (Payne 2003). This point is reinforced
by Moni, Beswick, and Moni (2005), who revised a marking scheme with a view to improve the assessment
quality of physiological concepts using group-constructed concept maps in a dentistry course. Therefore, the
choice of words to be used in the marking scheme can prove to be a challenge to both students and teachers as
well.
Wolf & Stevens, (2007) submit that another important consideration is that the performance to be
assessed should be observable and measurable. The challenge in creating performance descriptions is providing
enough information to guide the creation and scoring of the essay, examination, project, e.t.c but not so much
that it overwhelms the reader or the performer. Some descriptions of learning outcomes or performance criteria
are so vague that accurate measurement is difficult. For example, if the criterion is that Students will know the
states of Africa, it may not be clear what know means. Does knowing mean that students need only to be
able to list the states, or be able to fill in the names on a map, or draw a map of Africa, or discuss the history of
the state, or .? The measurement problem can be lessened if the performance to be assessed is described with
more specific action verbs where possible, such as list, identify draw, discuss, explain, compare, critique,
predict, and so on.
Teachers and students also face serious challenges in setting performance levels in a marking scheme.
Teachers often have to decide how many levels of performance are appropriate for the assessment. Typically,
marking schemes have from three to six rating levels. What drives the choice of the number of levels is the
purpose for the assessment. If the main purpose is to make summative decisions, such as whether someone will
pass or fail a course or an exam for example, then fewer levels are better. The fewer the levels of performance
for the marker to consider, the greater the reliability and efficiency, in scoring the performance. The more levels,
the lower the reliability in scoring and the more time it will take for markers or scorers to make the decision. If,
however, the primary purpose of the assessment is formative, or to give feedback to learners to support them in
improving their performance, then more performance levels (and more performance criteria) give the learner
more specific information about the features of the performance that need attention. The trade- off again is that
the greater number of scoring levels and performance criteria, the more time it takes the marker to assess the
performance (Wolf and Stevens, 2007; Andrade and Du, 2005). Therefore, the main challenge here is in coming
up with the appropriate trade-off point when setting performance levels in a marking scheme.
Another challenge for teachers is their lack of relevant knowledge on some sections of marking
schemes especially those designed by external boards such as ZIMSEC, Cambridge or the district. According to
Chinyemba, (2011)s study teachers noted that their inability to make sense of the problematic sections of the
marking scheme has affected in the allocation of marks, hence subjectivity was rife. In some cases, marks
allocated are too many as the kind of work could be done outside normal lessons and no one to authentic the
processes. The problematic sections of the marking scheme, therefore, affected teachers instructional
methodologies and also weakened their emphasis of probably important sections that promote creativity.
Another view was that the marking scheme did not state requirements of experiments (what to experiment on)
(Chinyemba, 2011). Students need practical experiments and not theoretical expression which makes it difficult
for students to conceptualize and for teacher to assess accurately. The decision is left to the teacher who usually
takes a leap in darkness following an imposed marking scheme.
Another challenge could be the dissemination of the marking scheme from the teachers to the students.
Teachers might feel vulnerable as students find it easier to challenge grading decisions (Koshy, 2008),
therefore in such instances teachers might be unwilling to share marking schemes with their students. However,
in Chinyemba, (2011)s research students indicated that an opportunity to use a marking scheme could give
them an idea of where to spend most of the time in order to get all the marks awarded to each stage, hence,
chance of researching on the project areas could be increased. Essentially the marking guide could pave way for
uniformity on presentation of the project giving a likely hood of high grades. According to the students it serves
time working on irrelevant things, no matter how good the idea maybe. It is necessary to concentrate efforts in
those areas that are difficult especially when working alone as some of the teachers did not seem to give much
attention to the design component.
2.1.4 How do teachers and students perceive marking schemes visa vie performance?
The multi-dimensionality of student learning requires the use of different methods and tools for
assessment of each of the dimensions (Dwyer et al, 2006; Seeratan, 2006). Learning is defined as the changes
in knowledge, understanding, skills and attitudes brought about by experience and reflection upon that
experience. Marking schemes support constructivist theories of learning, which emphasize upon students and
teachers to look to assessment as a source of continuous feedback for improvement of learning process rather
than as an evaluative process. The linkage between marking schemes, assessment and learning, is captured in
the statement Learning theory supports the idea that we retain the most when we are actively involving all of
our senses in a doing mode. By creating, sharing, and accomplishing the criteria set by a marking scheme, the
student is in charge of his or her own learning and assessment (Phillip, 2002:26). The use of a marking scheme,
if reinforced with relevant supporting learning activities like demonstrations or field trips, for example, could
help learners create mental pictures, and ideas which relate to real world cases. Holt (1984) and Head & Taylor
(1997) regard these as activities which offer students fresh insights. According to Head & Taylor (1997)
visualizations are fun, interesting and unusual because they allow the learner to be imaginative as it often
triggers the subconscious mind.
Findings from Brookhart, (2003); and Zimmerman & Schunk, (2001)s studies focusing on the impact
of marking schemes on learning, support the assertions that marking schemes facilitate student awareness of
learning goals as well as the application of feedback, both important in the assessment and learning cycle.
Marking schemes have been demonstrated to result in well-structured and well-defined assignments, and also
serve to incorporate a transparent formative assessment into the cycle of learning (Brookhart, 2003; Moskal,
2003; Shephard, 2000; Stiggins, 2001).
Teachers and administrators increasingly regard marking schemes as important tools in supporting
student learning as well as in facilitating more accurate and efficient evaluation of student work products. If
assessments are to truly be a part of instruction (Schaefer, Swanson, Bene & Newberry, 2001), the ways
students perceive and use marking schemes in the process of learning is important. The literature on marking
schemes state that the detailed feedback provided by these, are useful for guiding the improvement of student
learning at an aggregate as well as at an individual student level (Klenowski, 1996; Simon & Forgette-Giroux,
2001). Feedback acts as a catalyst in accelerating experience as well as reflection, which is a form of internal
feedback (Brown et al, 1999). Proponents of assessment reform such as Wiggins (1991) suggest the increased
usage of self-assessment, which is a part of self-regulated learning strategies. This is due to the emphasis of
self-assessment on making students self-reliant (Klenowski, 1996; Ross et al, 2006). Apart from feedback to the
students, the information so gathered is believed to serve as instructional illuminators, facilitating the process
of planning of instruction as well as improvement of course design (Popham, 1997; Petcov & Petcova, 2006).
Defined as a process of evaluation or judgment of the worth of ones performance and the
identification of ones strength and weaknesses with a view to improving ones outcomes (Klenowski, 1996),
self-assessment embodies three processes. These are, self-observation i.e. focus on aspects performance in
relation to the standards specified; self-judgment i.e. determining how well they have met the specified
learning goals; and self- reactions i.e. interpretations of the degree of goal achievement that express how
satisfied students are with the result of their actions (Ross, 2006). That development of self-assessment is
inseparable from any assessment aimed at improving learning is asserted by Wiggins (1991) who advocates the
use of explicit criteria to enable students to self-assess. It is in this light that marking schemes are being stated as
a mainstay of outcomes-based assessment (Popham, 1997; Holmes & Smith, 2003; Andrade & Du, 2005;
Oakleaf, 2006) and therefore merits increased attention from educators and researchers. The proposition that
marking schemes would lead to development of self-assessment has received theoretical support, and is
increasingly being cited as a promising area for empirical research (Petcov & Petcova, 2006; Suskie, 2004;
Andrade & Du, 2005).
Self- assessment is a part of self-regulated learning strategies and the current literature on educational
psychology considers self-regulated learning as an important perspective on academic learning (Pintrich,
1999). Self-regulation is the ability to monitor and control ones learning, usually involves some type of
monitoring of cognitive processes and is affected by the degree of motivation, social contexts, learning contexts
and self-efficacy factors (Brooks, 2006:11). Literature on self-regulated learning is extensive and recognizes
metacognitive strategies and motivation to have a positive influence on academic achievement (Suskie, 2004;
Pintrich, 1999; Brooks, 2006). Metacognition is learning how to learn and how to manage ones own learning
by understanding how one learns (Suskie, 2004:85). Most models of metacognitive strategies include three
general types of strategies namely Planning (goal setting); Monitoring (comparison of performance with goals
set); and Regulating (corrective action).
Of the models of motivation, which are considered relevant to student learning, self-efficacy beliefs are
associated with the constructivist and adult learning theories (Pintrich, 1999; Brooks, 2006). Self-efficacy is
defined as judgments of ones capabilities to perform academic tasks. Research on motivation and self-regulated
learning suggests that change in classroom practices facilitate learning (Suskie, 2004; Pintrich, 1999; Brooks,
2006). Development of Self-regulated thinking according to the Dimensions of Student Learning framework
enables students to monitor their own thinking; plan appropriately; identify and use necessary resources;
respond appropriately to feedback; and evaluate the effectiveness of their actions. According to Andrade & Du
(2005), when used as part of a formative, student-centred approach to assessment, marking schemes have the
potential to enable students to understand the requirements and improve the performance on their own. Marking
schemes support the metacognitive strategies of planning, monitoring and regulating.
The reviewed research on teachers and students perceptions of using marking schemes, shows that a
major benefit of marking schemes is that of bringing transparency to the assessment, which makes expectations
explicit. The question has been raised as to whether the transparency provided by marking schemes could
actually stifle creativity (Mabry, 1999; Messick, 1996). To avoid this, Wiggins (1998) emphasizes that marking
schemes should not restrict the format or the method. By using various examples or anchors it is also possible
to show that there are many ways to approach the same task. Student understanding of criteria, feedback,
possibilities of self- and peer assessment are other positive experiences reported. So even if it is not strictly
demonstrated that students do learn better, the students themselves perceive that they do. Knowing that learning
is influenced by factors such as motivation (Birenbaum et al., 2006), transparency of assessments can be seen as
a great contributor to learning.
To conclude, it seems like the use of marking schemes have the potential of promoting learning and/or
improving instruction, at least as perceived by the teachers and students using them, which in-turn translates to
higher academic achievements and or performances. The way in which marking schemes support learning and
instruction is by making expectations and criteria explicit, which also facilitates feedback and self-assessment.
2.2 Empirical Literature Review

2.2.1 Student perceptions of marking scheme use
The undergraduate and graduate business students in Boltons (2006) study asserted that marking
schemes enabled them to engage in important processes, including identifying critical issues in an assignment
and, thereby, reducing uncertainty and doing more meaningful work, determining the amount of effort needed
for an assignment, evaluating their own performances in order to get immediate feedback, especially on
weaknesses, estimating their grades prior to the submission of assignments and focussing their efforts so as to
improve performance on subsequent assignments.
These findings are strikingly similar to those found by Andrade & Du (2005). The 14 pre-service
teacher education undergraduates interviewed for this study reported that they used marking schemes to plan an
approach to an assignment, check their work and reflect on feedback from others. They said that using marking
schemes helped them focus their efforts, produce work of higher quality, earn better grades and feel less anxious
about an assignment. The students also emphasised their perceptions of marking scheme-referenced grading as
fair and transparent.
Reynolds-Keefer (2010), motivated by Andrade & Du (ibid) and in an effort to further examine the
impact of marking schemes on student learning, conducted a study that explored how marking schemes
impacted students learning, as well as whether using marking schemes influenced the likelihood that they
would use marking schemes in the future as teachers. In that study, 45 undergraduate students enrolled in
educational psychology were provided marking schemes for each of the two writing assignments assigned
during the semester. At the end of the semester, students were asked about their use of marking schemes as well
as the relationship between marking schemes and performance. Student perceptions of marking scheme
importance in learning underscored the findings in the earlier study (Andrade & Du, 2005), but also highlighted
the importance of using marking schemes as pre-service teachers. Responses indicated that pre-service teachers
who used marking schemes as students may be more likely to use marking schemes in their own teaching.
Koshy, (2008) conducted an exploratory research study on the use of marking criteria in the offshore
campus of an Australian University in the Middle East. The study drew similar findings as Andrade & Du
(2005). Students comments regarding marking scheme use were consistently positive. Students liked the fact
that marking schemes let them know whats expected, and contrasted it with the guessing game they felt
they had to play when teachers did not provide a marking scheme or some sort of guidelines for an assignment.
The most commonly cited purpose of marking schemes was to communicate the teachers expectations and
thereby provide direction. Students also noted that marking schemes help identify strengths and weaknesses in
their work when used to give feedback, and that knowing what counts made grades seem fair.
2.2.2 Teacher perceptions of marking scheme use

There is evidence of both positive responses and resistance to marking scheme use by school, college
and university teachers. Five studies report positive teacher perceptions of marking schemes as scoring guides.
The teachers in Powells (2001) study of assessment in film and television production courses felt that marking
schemes provided an objective basis for evaluation. Likewise, Campbell (2005), who described the development
of a marking scheme-based e-marking tool, reported that the teachers who used the e-marking tool with multiple
classes perceived that the tool made them mark or grade more consistently, reliably and efficiently. A similar
finding is from Reitmeier, Svendsen, & Vrchota, (2004:18) who reported that the use of marking schemes for
oral presentation evaluations facilitated the change in evaluation procedures from subjective observations to
specific performances. Similarly, Michlitch & Sidle (2002) conducted a survey-based study to identify the
assessment methods used by teachers (N= 50) in two US based business schools teachers and their level of
satisfaction with the same. The results showed that tests/ exams; individual/ group assignments; case studies /
problems assignments; observation of student group process in resolving case studies / problems were rated high
terms of both frequency and effectiveness. A mismatch between frequency of usage and perceived effectiveness
of assessment methods was detected for the methods of analytic scoring of student writing assignments to
break down each skill area and observation of student presentations measuring performance, using criterion.
According to the authors, the teachers believed that the use of these methods would lead to greatly enhanced
student learning and emphasized upon the requirement for effective tools to guide assessment of student
performances when using these methods.
Parkes (2006), however, reports contrasting results. Employing a two-group prepost-quasi-
experimental research design, Parkes examined the impact of music performance marking schemes on grading
satisfaction by students (N = 44) and faculty (N = 11). Conducted in three music institutions, the study did not
find any significant differences in student and teacher attitudes towards grading after the use of marking
schemes. Noting that the unwillingness of the faculty to participate was a major limitation of the study, Parkes
emphasized the need to better understand the reasons for faculty hesitation regarding the study and use of
marking schemes.
One striking difference between students and teachers perceptions of marking scheme use is related
to their perceptions of the purposes of marking schemes. Students frequently referred to them as serving the
purposes of learning and achievement, while teachers focused almost exclusively on the role of a marking
scheme in quickly, objectively and accurately assigning grades. Teachers limited conception of the purpose of a
marking scheme might contribute to their unwillingness to use them. School, college and university teachers
might be more receptive if they understand that marking schemes can be used to enhance teaching and learning
as well as to evaluate.
2.2.3 Marking scheme use and academic performance

The linkage between marking schemes and learning has been explored by several researchers, with
results generally suggesting higher achievement and deeper learning by students who have marking schemes to
guide their work. Petcov & Petcova (2006) examined the final grades for a short-term project in a post-graduate
level course entitled Management of Business Information. The two-group post-test design involved assigning a
similar project to two classrooms with 20 students each. The students in one of the classrooms were provided
with the project marking scheme at the beginning of the semester. Comparison of the project grades attained by
students in the two classrooms showed that the mean percentage grade for the section using marking schemes
was significantly higher than the comparison group of students.
Similarly, Reitmeier, Svendsen, & Vrchota (2004) reported a study in which marking schemes were
used for repeated teacher, self- and peer-assessments of oral communication skills in a food preparation course.
The single group, longitudinal study required all the students to self- and peer assess a minimum of four oral
presentations over the course of a semester. The average score of the presentations that semester was higher than
the average score attained by students in a similar course the previous semester. In addition, the average grade
for the course was 94%, as compared to 86% in the previous semester. The researchers also reported increases
in interaction and participation in the classroom, along with enhanced understanding of food science. This latter
deduction was made on the basis of judgments of more thoughtful and scientific questions asked towards the
end of the semester. The authors attribute the development of higher level thinking skills to the use of marking
schemes for self- and peer assessments.
A similar study which reported contrasting findings is by Green and Bowser (2006). Having used a
marking scheme for evaluating the masters thesis literature reviews in a two-group post-test design (N = 16), a
t-test conducted on the total score means showed that there were no significant differences between scores of
samples written without and with marking schemes. The contradictory findings can probably be explained in
terms of the very small sample size, as well as the limited way in which the marking scheme was put to use in
this study, which was to simply make the marking scheme available to the students prior to the submission of
the reviews. Andrade (2001) has shown that just providing a marking scheme to middle school students is not
consistently associated with better performance, and concludes that students must engage deeply with marking
schemes, perhaps by co-creating them and using them for self- and peer assessments, as students did in the
Reitmeier, Svendsen, and Vrchota (2004) study.
In Zimbabwe, Chinyemba, (2011) conducted a study entitled The Impact of Standardized marking
scheme on Improvement of Instruction in Design Project work in Technical Subjects. The learners in this
instance were a group of technical subjects students at 18 purposively selected secondary schools in
Zimbabwes Mashonaland West Provinces five educational districts. Data was collected using a structured
questionnaire survey involving 30 teachers of technical subjects and 529 Ordinary level students selected using
the availability sampling technique. The findings of the study reveals that the use of the marking scheme forced
teachers to write superficial comments on students work, fail to explicitly explain concepts to learners and
deliver justice to the topic. From the learners perspective the use of the marking scheme did not improve
teachers instructional methodologies; instead, teachers became prone to adopting frontal methods more often
with little exploration of creative design activities and their application. It was concluded teachers would
continue facing challenges of fruitfully engaging the marking scheme as a significant instructional and
assessment tool if efforts are not taken to address what they perceived as problematic issues. In the light of the
aforementioned findings the study recommended teacher support systems that can help take advantage of the
marking scheme and development of materials to enhance chances of successful instructional strategy that
accommodate students feeling and interests in terms of developing creativity.
These studies lend support to the view that marking schemes have the potential to act as instructional
illuminators (Popham, 1997). Although the authors do not use the term instructional illuminators, they do
deliberate upon the value of marking schemes in identifying the understandings and skills to be taught and
learned, and of providing detailed, criteria specific feedback to teachers and departments on which of those
understandings and skills have been mastered by students and which have not. As a result, the marking schemes
informed the process of making improvements to courses and instructions. The key to this process, of course, is
a clear, valid and reliable marking scheme, without which the method is useless at best and possibly even
misleading.
III. MATERIALS & METHODS

The research adopted a qualitative research design, which is celebrated by many scholars such as
Domegan & Fleming, 2007; Henning et al, 2004; Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Richardson, 1995) for being the best
approach when studying human learning. The purpose of the study is to investigate and evaluate, without
manipulation, the use of marking schemes in the teaching and learning of Commerce at Ordinary level course as
it unfolds in real world situations, that is, to study events in their natural setting with a view to interpreting
phenomena in terms of the meaning individuals attach to them. The focus was on participants multiple
perceptions, meanings of events and processes in teaching and learning, and the researchers understanding of
these. Given the nature of the research questions, the case study methodology was considered the most
appropriate approach to employ because it provides a systematic way to collect data, analyse information, and
report the results, thus understand a particular problem or situation in great depth.
In this study the researchers divided the population into teachers (10), comprising of 3 females and 7
males; and students (120). The students were further subdivided into 20 students from three schools (Choto
Tafara [8 boys and 12 girls], Maboke [11 boys and 9 girls], Marirangwe [7 boys and 13 girls]) with one Form 4
class each and 30 students from two schools (Chitombo [10 boys and 10 girls], Marimasimbe [10 boys and 10
girls]) with three Form 4 classes each. Effectively a sample of 120 students (46 boys and 54 girls) was used in
this study out of possible 405 Form 4 Commerce students and all 10 Commerce teachers. Questionnaires were
then distributed to these different strata. Interviews were conducted with randomly selected representatives of
these groups. The data from the interviews and questionnaires was then pooled for analysis and results drawn
from the analysis. Convenience sampling was also used in order to facilitate the sampling of respondents that
are accessible during the study with minimum effort. This was used especially in selecting the schools to base
the study on. The five schools were selected on the basis of accessibility and convenience to the researchers.
The study used three research instruments. These are questionnaires, the interviews and observations.
Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted for in order to stimulate discussions not only to reveal and
understand the what and the how but also to place considerable emphasis on exploring the why part of the
subject matter. Such interviews helped in the critical assessment of different views on the use of marking guides
and or marking schemes in the teaching and learning of Commerce. When conducting semi-structured
interviews the researchers had a list of themes and questions to be covered although these sometimes varied
from interview to interview. During observation, the researcher was able to record the non-verbal comments by
the pupils. The use of observation also meant that the study could take note of the effectiveness of the use of
marking schemes in the teaching and learning of Commerce as a subject. This was a very critical instrument as
it allowed the researchers to observe the attitudes and perceptions of both teachers and learners during the use of
marking schemes. A total of 15 lessons were successfully observed during the course of the study. However,
due to limited resources, a total of 10 of the observed lessons were from one school, Choto Tafara. The
remaining lessons were distributed as follows: Maboke, 1; Marirangwe, 1; Chitombo, 1; and Marimasimbe, 2.
Finally, there was retrieval of information from secondary (the internet, libraries, and official school
www.dynamicresearchjournals.org 10 | P a g e
documents). These included textbooks, journals, minute books, results analysis schedules, charts, registers and
circulars.
All these various data collection techniques were done in order to cater for issues to do with reliability,
validity and or authenticity. Furthermore, validity and reliability were checked through triangulation, peer de-
briefing, having a totally transparent, systematic approach to data collection from sources; maintaining an audit
trail, documenting clearly the flow and processing of the data, member checking and having some kind of focus
group with a sample of other teachers to ensure that data for the research represented what it was supposed to.
Data was analysed using qualitative analysis techniques such as pie charts, tables and graphs.
IV. DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

The researchers distributed and administered 120 questionnaires to ordinary level Commerce students
and 10 questionnaires to Commerce teachers in five secondary schools in the case study area(s). All the
questionnaires distributed to teachers were returned even though it was after some hustles with some
participants, and 10 questionnaires administered to students were not returned as most claimed to have either
misplaced or lost them. Effectively, this means that 110 student respondents completed and returned their
questionnaires. All the questionnaires distributed to teachers were successfully completed.
4.1 Questionnaire for Teachers

Qualifications and experience of respondent teachers
It was established from the questionnaire that most of the Commerce teachers are holders of first
degrees in Commerce or Business Studies, but without teacher training. These constituted 40%. Those with
undergraduate degrees and at the same time hold certificates in education constituted a total of 20% while there
were no untrained teachers. Teachers who hold only a diploma in education certificate constituted 40 % of the
population as illustrated in the table below.
Qualification/ Teacher education Frequency in percentage
Untrained teachers 0%
Diploma in education holders 40% (4)
Degree but without education 40% (4)
Degree with education 20% (2)
Total 100%
Table 1 Teacher education
Source: Field notes
The table above indicates that the sample was made up of teachers who are qualified to teach and those
who are awaiting training. However, the larger percentages of 60% of the sample are qualified teachers versus
the 40% of teachers without teacher training.
Teacher Experience
60% of the surveyed teachers have zero to five years teaching experience; while 30% have between 5-
10 years of teaching experience; only one teacher (10% of the surveyed teachers) had acquired more than ten
years teaching experience as illustrated in the pie chart below.
Percentage
0-5 years 5-10 years 10+ years
10%
30%
60%
Figure 1Teacher experience
Therefore, most of the teachers in the study area have been exposed to appropriate teaching methodology
through training as already shown in table 1 and figure 1 above. This implies that the majority of the Commerce
teachers have been exposed to marking schemes as a teaching methodology through teacher training
programmes. Qualified and dedicated teachers determine the success of students in their academic endeavours.
Teachers are regarded as educational policy implementers, hence their attributes matter most. Oshodi (1998),
Duyilami & Duyilami (2002) asserted that students in any country cannot perform beyond the quality of their
teachers. Important teacher attributes, as highlighted by Bangbade (2004), include knowledge of the subject
matter, communication ability, emotional stability, good human relationship and interest in the job.
Knowledge of marking scheme(s) [Teachers]

Analysis of responses indicated that 90% of the respondents were conversant with marking schemes.
Only a single respondent (10%) indicated that he/she was not sure of what constitutes a marking scheme. 90%
of the participants who answered yes gave several explanations on marking schemes. In summary, they stated
that the use of the marking scheme allows the teacher to use direct instruction in which he/she is actively
engaged in bringing the content of the lesson to students by teaching the whole class directly (Munjs &
Reynolds, 2001). The whole class approach is found to be more effective than individualized learning
approaches. According to Munjs & Reynolds, the whole class approach allows the teacher to make more
contacts with each individual student than individual work. The belief is that, it is easier to monitor the whole
class while teaching than to monitor individual students (Munjs & Reynolds, 2001).
Effectiveness of marking schemes in instruction [Teachers]

It is encouraging to note that 70% (20%-those who strongly agree plus 50%-those who just agree) of
the respondents concurred with the view that marking schemes are effective tools of instruction that enhance
understanding amongst students. This may be due to their vast practical experience in teaching using marking
schemes. These findings are similar to those of scholars such as Andrade & Du (2005), Wolf & Stevens (2007),
Reynolds-Keefer (2010), Koshy (2008) as well as Chinyemba (2011); who all concur that marking schemes
have the potential to enhance student learning and foster high academic achievements by students. 30% of the
undecided and disagreeing respondents explained that marking schemes are not the only teaching method or tool
for enhancing student understanding citing role play, group work, case studies and simulations as other
techniques that could be used instead.
Percentage (%)
Strongly Agree
10%0% Agree
20% 20%
Undecided
Disagree
50%
Figure 2 Effectiveness of marking schemes in instruction

Source: Field notes
Benefit(s) of using marking scheme as a teaching technique/tool in Commerce

The most cited benefit of using marking schemes in teaching was to ensure that marking is done
consistently across scripts and across markers hence ensuring fairness, accuracy and mark relevance. Others
indicated that marking schemes simplify their work by making marking easy. Some had the misconception that
providing a marking scheme to the students relieved them of their obligation to give feedback to their pupils,
while others opined that marking schemes served as target illuminators and enhanced feedback for their pupils.
Use of marking schemes [Teachers]

Despite the positive responses to the marking scheme as an effective tool for enhancing student
understanding and the numerous benefits of using marking schemes articulated by the same respondents, a
majority of them (50%) indicated that they used marking schemes monthly. A further 30% of surveyed
respondents indicated that they used them once per term. These numbers may be attributed to challenges
inherent in the designing of comprehensive marking schemes, and the labour and time needed for their design.
One may also assume that the teachers lack the requisite skills for designing and using marking schemes in the
teaching and learning process. The only teacher who indicated that using marking schemes daily showed serious
appreciation of the benefits of using them.
Percentage (%)
Once per term 30
Monthly 50
Weekly 10
Daily 10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percentage (%)
Figure 3 Frequency of use of marking schemes

Source: Field notes
Challenges encountered in using marking scheme

The most commonly cited challenge was in the designing of marking scheme. Most respondents
surveyed indicated that they faced serious difficulties in deciding what to include or not include in marking
schemes. They also indicated that they faced a dilemma in choosing between creating task-specific marking
schemes and creating holistic marking schemes. Some claimed that they did not have enough time to create
task-specific marking schemes because of other job-related commitments such as scheming, evaluating,
recording and co-curricular activities. Respondent 8 indicated that he/she faces a dilemma when they encounter
a different answer than that in the marking scheme the challenge is on how to handle such an answer when
marking students work.
The other challenge cited was that of aligning learning goals/outcomes with assessment goals and
criteria. Some pointed out that it is often difficult, if not impossible, to align learning outcomes or goals with
assessment goals citing discrepancies between the aims and objectives in most subject syllabi and the goals of
assessment.
Marking scheme(s) versus Good quality results

Most of the teachers surveyed indicated that to a greater extent marking schemes could be used to
achieve quality results by the students. They reiterated that marking schemes illuminate the target for students
hence they can adequately allocate resources and time in an examination or when working on an assignment.
They also indicated that marking schemes enabled them to give adequate feedback to their students. However,
they were quick to point out marking schemes cannot be used in isolation, but can be used to compliment other
teaching strategies such as field trips, case studies, group works and simulations.
Questionnaire for pupils

A questionnaire with questions was used to receive feedback from students about their perceptions on
the use of marking schemes. A summary of the results of the questionnaire is presented below in tabular format.
Table 2 Questionnaire Analysis of Student Perceptions on Use of Marking Schemes (at one decimal
place).
Student perceptions about Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Disagree
the use of marking agree
schemes for assignments %
and other learning % % % %
activities
1 Marking schemes should be 50 40 8.3 1.7 0
provided for all
assignments.
2 I review the marking 20 46.7 21.7 11.7 0
scheme provided before I
start work on an
assignment.
3 Reviewing the marking 36.7 50 10 3.3 0
scheme before starting
work on an assignment is
useful.
4 The marking schemes 11.7 48.3 21.7 18.3 0
provided at the school by
the teacher are easy to
follow.
5 If the marking schemes are 7.6 16.7 15 24 36.7
used there is no need for
feedback from the teacher.
6 Detailed marking schemes 5 35 25 30 5
are not necessary, broad
descriptions are enough.
7 Peer marking using 5 46.7 40 6.7 0
marking schemes is useful.
8 The teacher must review 35 50 13.3 1.7 0
the marking scheme with
the students before an
assignment.
9 Marking schemes help me 18.3 57.7 20 10 0
to compare my marks with
those of other students
easily.
10 The purpose of the marking Fairness Reference Students Accuracy Feedback Easy
scheme is to ensure while know what is to students marking
working expected of for
them teachers
First 11.7% 12.4% 23.3% 17.6% 21.7% 13.3%
choice
Second 16.7% 16.1% 15.5% 16.7% 16.7% 18.3%
choice
Third 15.1% 16.6% 19.9% 21.7% 10% 16.7%
choice
Source: Field notes
It is very encouraging to note that 90% of the students agreed that marking schemes should be provided
for all assignments and it was proof of their awareness of the utility of using marking schemes for assignments.
However, when asked if they reviewed the scheme before starting work on an assignment the numbers fell to
67% in spite of 87% of students surveyed believing that it was useful to review schemes before starting work on
assignments. Disappointingly 40% of the students were of the opinion that the schemes provided by the teacher
at the school were not easy to follow perhaps this could be attributed to the calibre of the students (mediocre
and slow learners). This could explain why they did not review it though they thought it was useful. Over 60%
students who responded opined that marking schemes could not be substituted for feedback from teachers and
this may be linked to the fact that schemes were not easy to follow. 40% of students surveyed believed that
detailed marking schemes were not necessary maybe these were high achievers in their classes hence they
could easily deduce the relevant information from the marking schemes. The majority was aware of the benefits
of peer marking using marking schemes as they had used it before. 85% believed the teacher must review the
marking scheme with students before an assignment this could be because the schemes were not easy to
follow. If the teacher reviews the scheme in class, it would ensure that all students are familiar with it.
When asked about the purpose of the marking scheme, 23.3% students chose teacher expectations as
their first choice answer. They liked the fact that marking schemes let them know what is expected, and
contrasted it with the guessing game they felt they had to play when teachers did not provide a marking
scheme or some sort of guideline for an assignment. In fact, the most commonly cited purpose of marking
schemes was to communicate the teachers expectations and thereby provide direction. Students (21.7%) also
noted that marking schemes help identify strengths and weaknesses in their work when used to give feedback,
and knowing what counts made grades seem fair. Fairness ranked last (11.7%) as a first choice answer.
Findings from Interviews

When commenting on how marking schemes impacted approach and completing of an assignment
responses indicated overwhelmingly that marking schemes were an aid to students in both planning and in
production of the assignment. The bulk of students responded that they read the marking scheme and then began
the assignment, using the marking scheme as a reference point or to answer questions throughout their process.
Some comments underscored the importance of marking schemes in giving structure to an assignment,
essentially providing what one student called An outline of what it should look like. Several students stated
that they worked through the assignment by reading the marking scheme and working on one portion at a time,
merging all the separate parts before submitting.
Students indicated that an opportunity to use a marking scheme could give them an idea of where to
spend most of the time in order to get all the marks awarded to each stage, hence, chance of researching on the
assignment areas could be increased. Essentially the marking guide could pave way for uniformity on
presentation of the project giving a likelihood of high grades. According to the students it serves time working
on irrelevant things, no matter how good the idea maybe. It is necessary to concentrate efforts in those areas that
are difficult especially when working alone. The following response extracts reflect a shared and probably
conflicting scenario suggesting the extent to which teachers fail to give support to their students:
Respondent 21: Using marking scheme is good because you know what you are targeting; the objective of
what you are doing is clear. Marking schemes provided by the teacher are not difficult to use. We need extra
feedback from the teacher, not just the marked answer sheet we need more qualitative feedback than a
number. Only those who want to score high marks use it, others dont bother. It is necessary to get all students
to use it, but if students dont care you really cant do much. There should be a marking scheme for sure.
Respondent 14: Some areas can be very difficult in individual work and sharing information on how it
is marked will help me understand and do it easily.
Respondent 12: we need the marking scheme because we sometimes do not understand what the
teacher is saying.
Respondent 7: It is better to have the information than to have teacher spending most of the time talking about
his 5 years experience of teaching Commerce.
Respondent 1: Sometimes we get lost and confused we do not know what to do and what not to do. Having a
marking scheme makes me feel more comfortable asking a question about an assignment and knowing what I
need to do.
Respondent 25: We need to get ideas from the teacher and not just simply giving the assignment question and
forget about us.
Respondent 23: I do better the closer I follow the marking scheme. The further away from the marking
scheme I go, the lower my grade is.
The responses to all questions regarding the impact of using a rubric as a student were generally
positive, and students indicated that marking schemes are important to their process as learners, as well as in
their perceptions of assessment and learning in the classroom. Students indicated marking schemes were helpful
in completing assignments, and as in Andrade and Du (2005), they expressed that marking schemes gave them
insight into teacher expectations. Marking schemes were clearly important to most students in the process of
completing assignments. Although most comments were positive, areas of concern emerged regarding marking
schemes as a part of the assessment cycle, as well as student anxiety regarding understanding the rubric. There
was less consistency in the construct of student perceptions of marking schemes, specifically regarding grading.
Students commented that for teachers, grading was easier using marking schemes and resulted in consistent
feedback; however, numerous students commented that generic comments on marking schemes were not
helpful. Additionally, several students commented that their anxiety increased when instructors used marking
schemes, stating that the pressure to produce very specific high quality work created discomfort for them as
learners.
Findings from Observations

Despite the obvious knowledge of teachers on the benefits of using marking schemes, generally it was
observed that teachers do not regularly design (formal) and use marking schemes. When marking the common
trend is for teachers to mark using marking schemes in their heads. They usually attribute this practice to
vast teaching experience and they have a misconception of being fountains of knowledge and that knowledge
is static. Teachers usually to do not give full marking schemes to their pupils, and in cases where they do, they
do not give adequate feedback to students. They tend to assume that students read and understand comments or
remarks made on their answer scripts. In cases where marking schemes are used in the teaching and learning
process, teachers use them to drill their students especially those who are about to sit for their final
examinations at Ordinary level.
On the other hand it was observed that students are keen on the use of marking schemes in their learning
process especially high achievers. They believe that marking schemes makes the allocation of grades fair and
their target in an assignment is clearly outlined for them. They believe it helps them in the allocation of
resources and time when working on an assignment. Through using marking schemes students can compare
their performances to that of their peers and they can reflect on their work. However, it was observed that slow
learners rarely reviewed marking schemes provided by their teachers. These have difficulty in deducing the
meaning and relevance of the marking scheme.
V. CONCLUSIONS
It can, therefore, be concluded from the findings presented above that indeed marking schemes are an
effective tool of instruction in the teaching and learning of Commerce. Survey results clearly concur with the
available theoretical frameworks on the subject matter (Andrade & Du, 2005; Stiggins, 2001; Wolf & Stevens,
2007; Koshy, 2008; Reynolds-Keefer, 2010). Students are keen on marking schemes because apart from being
considered as an effective tool for measuring, evaluating and reporting student achievement, marking schemes
are also designed to guide students learning, teachers instruction, course development and administrators
programme observations. However, it should be noted that marking schemes should be used in conjunction with
other teaching approaches to achieve best results.
Teachers are facing a number of challenges in using marking schemes for teaching. Firstly, there is the
issue of time, which does not permit teachers to prepare marking schemes for their assignments often. The
second issue is that marking schemes require specific knowledge and skill in their design such that they cover
all the aspects of assignment which often teachers do not possess. Also, teachers are guided by the syllabus and
so the major concern is to cover the syllabus on time while students are at school in order for them to be able to
write their exams and pass. Therefore, teachers do not prioritize teaching methodology over time constraints.
Because of the problems mentioned above a most teachers use marking schemes rarely, while the majority does
not use them at all despite their numerous obvious advantages.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this study, the researchers recommend the following alternatives for the successful
and effective use of marking schemes in the teaching and learning of Commerce at Ordinary level:
i. Internalizing marking criteria by the students: it is not enough for the teacher to explain the criteria;
students have to work with it to internalize it, for example, through peer or self-evaluation.
ii. Inducting students to the marking schemes: teachers have to provide clear and easy to follow marking
schemes and also explain the items on the scheme as well as the scoring standards or scales used.
Guesswork by students will lead misunderstandings about the set objectives.
iii. Teachers should give qualitative feedback through marking schemes: learning and teaching both
depend on feedback for improvement.
iv. The study recommends teacher support system(s) that can help take advantage of the marking scheme
and development of materials to enhance chances of successful instructional strategy that accommodate
students feeling and interests.
v. It is also recommended that workshops be organized to sensitize teachers on effective teaching
strategies/tools such as marking schemes.
vi. In carrying out his study, only five secondary schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri were used, further
research could be carried on more schools and on more subjects.
REFERENCES
[1]. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2000). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Blooms
taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman
[2]. Andrade, H & Du, Y (2005). Student perspective on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical
[3]. Andrade, H. and Du, Y. (2005), Student Perspectives on Rubric-referenced Assessment, Practical Assessment and Research
Evaluation, Vol.10, No.3,http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n3.pdf
[4]. Angelo, T. (2002). Fostering critical thinking in our courses: Practical, research-based strategies to improve learning. The
Pennsylvania State University Teaching and Learning Colloquy VIII. May 8, 2002Ariely, D (2008). Predictably irrational: the
hidden forces that shape our decisions, Harper Collins Publishers, New York
[5]. Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Retrieved from:http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n3.pdf
[6]. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The
classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay
[7]. Bloxham, S. & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher Education: A practical Guide, Maidenhead: Open
University Press
[8]. Bolton, C.F. (2006). Rubrics and adult learners: Andragogy and assessment. Assessment Update18, no. 3
[9]. Brew, A. 2003, Towards Autonomous Assessment: Using Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment, Assessment Matters in Higher
Education: Choosing and Using Diverse Approaches, Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
[10]. Brookhart,S.M.(2013).How to create and use rubrics for formative Assessment and grading,Alexendria,Va:ASCD
[11]. Chinyemba, F (2011). The impact of standardized marking scheme on improvement of instruction in design project work in
technical subjects, Journal of Innovative Research in Education, 1(1): 102-113
[12]. Dunn, L., Morgan, C., OReilly, M. and Parry, S. (2004), The Student Assessment Handbook, New York, Routledge Falmer
[13]. Denzin, J.& Lincoln. [Eds] (2003). Introduction, The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oak, CA: Sage
Publishing Company
[14]. Delpit, L.D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in educating other peoples children, Havard Educational
Review58(3)
[15]. Domegan, C.& Flenning, D. (2007). Marketing Research in Ireland, Theory and Practice,3rd Edition, Gill and MacMillan
[16]. Dwyer, C. A., Millett, C. M. and Payne, D. G. (2006) A Culture of Evidence: Postsecondary Assessment and Learning Outcomes.
Recommendations to Policymakers and the Higher Education Community, accessed from www.ets.org.
[17]. Glenn. (2005). Outcomes Assessment in higher Education: Using Assessment Instrument to improve business Curriculum and
Instrument at Association of Collegiate Business School and Programs ACBSP, Thesis. Philadelphia PA: St Joseph University
[18]. Glickman-Bond, J. and Rose, K. (2006) Creating and Using Rubrics in Todays Classrooms, Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon
Publishers, Inc.
[19]. Green, R., and M. Bowser. (2006). Observations from the field: Sharing a literature review rubric. Journal of Library Administration
45, nos. 12
[20]. Hafner, J. C. and Hafner, P. M. (2003) Quantitative Analysis of the Rubric as an Assessment Tool: An Empirical Study of Student
Peer-Group Rating. International Journal of Science Education 25, 12,
[21]. Head, K. & Taylor, P. (1997). Teacher Development, Macmillan Heinemann ELT
[22]. Henning, E., van Rensburg, W., Smit, B. (2004). Finding your way in Qualitative Research, Pretoria Van Schaik
[23]. Holmes, L. & Smith L. (2003). Student Evaluation of Faculty grading methods, Journal of Education for Business 78
[24]. Isaacs, G. (2001) Assessment for Learning. Teaching and learning in Higher Education Series. Brisbane, Australia: Teaching and
Educational Development Institute, University of Queensland.
[25]. Holmes, J. E. and Smith L. J. (2003) Student Evaluations of Faculty Grading Methods. Journal of Education for Business 78, 6,
[26]. Koshy, S. (2008). Using marking criteria to improve learning: An evaluation of Student perceptions, University of Wollongeng
Dubai
[27]. Mabry. (1999). Writing to the rubric: lingering effects of traditional standardized testing on direct writing assessment, Phi
DeltaKappen 80(9)
[28]. Massick, S. (1996). Validity and Washback in Language Testing, Educational Testing Service Princeton, New Jersey
[29]. McCulloch, M. (2007). An introduction to Assessment. University of Glasgow, From http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/learn
[30]. Michlitsch, J. F. and Sidle, M. W. (2002) Assessing Student Learning Outcomes: A Comparative Study of Techniques used in
Business School Disciplines. Journal of Education for Business January/February, 123-130
[31]. Moskal, B. M. (2000) Scoring Rubrics: What, When, and How? Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7, 3. Retrieved
from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=3
[32]. Naidu, S (2006). E Learning: A Guidebook of Principles 2nd Revised Edition, Commonwealth Educational Media Centre for Asia
[CEMCA] and the Commonwealth of Learning, New Delhi India
[33]. Nyoni, M., Nyoni, T., and Bonga, W.G (2017). Factors Affecting Students Academic Achievement in Zimbabwes Rural
Secondary Schools: A Case Study of Marimasimbe Secondary School in Jiri Community, Dynamic Research Journals Journal of
Economics and Finance (DRJ-JEF), 2(3): 1-15
[34]. Parkes, K.A. (2006). The effect of performance rubrics on college level applied studio grading. PhD diss., University of Maimi. UMI
No. 3215237.
[35]. Payne, D.A. 2003. Applied educational assessment. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning
[36]. Petkov, D. and Petkova, O. (2006) Development of Scoring Rubrics for IS Projects as an Assessment Tool. Issues in Informing
Science and Information Technology 3,
[37]. Pintrich, P. R. (1999) The Role of Motivation in Promoting and Sustaining Self-Regulated Learning. International Journal of
Education Research 31, 6,
[38]. Popham, J.W. (1997). Whats wrong and whats right-with rubrics, Educational Leadership 62[2]
[39]. Oakleaf, M.J. (2006). Assessing Information Literacy Skills: Rubric Approach [Thesis], University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
[40]. Powell, T. A. (2001) Improving Assessment and Evaluation Methods in Film and Television
Production Courses. (Thesis). Minneapolis, MN: Capella University
[41]. Ramsden, P. (2000), Learning to Teach in Higher Education, London: Routledge.
[42]. Reynolds-Keefer. (2010). Rubric referenced Assessment in teacher preparation. An opportunity to learn by using Practical
Assessment, Research and Education Vol 15 No. [8], University of Michigan-Dearben
[43]. Richardson. (1995). Mature Students in higher Education: An investigation of approaches to studying and Academic performance.
Studies in Higher Education 20[1]
[44]. Ross,J.A.(2006).The reliability, validity and utility of Self-Assessment, Research & Evaluation, from
http://pareonline.net/pdf/v11n10.pdf
[45]. Seeratan, K. L. (2006) Assessing and Enhancing Learning Outcomes in an Architectural Context: Meaning Equivalence
Methodology versus Traditional Formats of Testing. (Thesis) University of Toronto
[46]. Stiggings. (2001). Student involved discussion assessment [3rd Ed], New York: Merrill
[47]. Suskie, L. (2004) Assessing Student learning. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.
[48]. Wiggins, G. (1991) Standards, Not Standardization: Evoking Quality Student Work. Educational Leadership 48, 5,
[49]. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
[50]. Wolf & Stevens. (2007). The role of rubrics in advancing and assessing student learning, The Journal of Effective Teaching 7(1)
[51]. Zimmerman, B.J. & Schunk D.H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical Perceptives, Hahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum
APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

Please answer the following questions by ticking the appropriate boxes or by filling in the blank boxes/spaces
provided. Do not write your name on this questionnaire.
1. Qualifications / Teacher education
Qualification Tick
High School
Diploma in Education
Degree with Education
Degree without Education
2. How long have you been in the teaching field?

Less than 1 year 1-5 years
5-10 years Above 10 years
3. Do you understand what is meant by marking scheme(s)?

Yes No
If yes briefly explain

___________________________________________________________________
4. Marking scheme is an effective tool of instruction that enhances understanding amongst students.
Strongly agree Agree
Undecided Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Explain
____________________________________________________________________
5. What do you consider to be the most important benefit of using marking scheme as a teaching technique/tool in
Commerce?
___________________________________________________________________
Explain the reason why

___________________________________________________________________
6. Do you employ marking scheme in your day to day teaching?

Yes No
If yes how often?

Daily Monthly
Weekly Once per term
7. What are the challenges you face as a Commerce teacher that hinder you from using a marking scheme?
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
8. Can one use marking scheme technique per se and achieve the expected good quality results?
____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWEES (TEACHERS)

1. Can you briefly explain what you understand by the term marking scheme.
2. In your own opinion how do you think marking schemes impact on the teaching and learning process?
3. What are some of the benefits to both the teacher and the students of using marking scheme?
4. What do you consider to be the role of a teacher in the class? What of students?
5. Can you comment generally on the use of marking schemes in the past years/months you have been at
this school?
6. What are your recommendations?
7. Is it possible to use marking schemes in teaching all concepts covered in Commerce as a subject?
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PUPILS

Statement Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
agree Disagree
1. Marking schemes should be provided for all marking
schemes
2. I review the marking scheme provided before I start to
work on an assignment
3. Reviewing the marking scheme before starting work on
an assignment is useful
4. The marking schemes provided at the school by the
teacher are easy to follow
5. If the marking schemes are used there is no need for
feedback from the teacher
6. Detailed marking schemes are not necessary, broad
descriptions are enough
7. Peer marking using marking schemes are is useful
8. The teacher must review the marking scheme with the
pupils before an assignment
9. Marking schemes help me to compare my marks with
those of other students easily
Use the following table to answer the following question: Tick where applicable
10. What is the purpose of the marking scheme?
Fairness Reference while Students know what is Accuracy Feedback to Easy marking for
working expected of them students Teachers
1st Choice
2nd Choice
3rd Choice
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR PUPILS

1. How (if at all) do marking schemes add to your understanding of a teachers expectations?
2. How (if at all) do marking schemes help you plan how to approach an assignment?
3. How (if at all) do you use a marking scheme in the process of completing an assignment?
4. How (if at all) do marking schemes impact your ability to reflect on your work?
5. To what extent (if at all) do you think marking schemes impact grading?
6. To what degree (if at all) do you think using marking schemes affect the quality of your work?
7. To what extent do marking schemes impact the level of anxiety you feel about assignments?

An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and Learning of Commerce at Ordinary level: A Case Study of Five (5) Secondary Schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe South District, Midlands, Zimbabwe.

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and Learning of Commerce at Ordinary level: A Case Study of Five (5) Secondary Schools in Chiefs Sayi and Jiri areas in Gokwe South District, Midlands, Zimbabwe.

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Dynamic Research Journals (DRJ)

Journal of Economics and Finance (DRJ-JEF)

An Evaluation of the use of Marking Schemes in the Teaching and

Corresponding Author: Mr. Q. Masayile- masayile.q@gmail.com

1.1 Background of Study

1.2 Statement of the problem

1.3 Research question(s)

1.5 Research Significance

1.6 Definition of terms

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical Literature Review

2.2 Empirical Literature Review

2.2.2 Teacher perceptions of marking scheme use

2.2.3 Marking scheme use and academic performance

III. MATERIALS & METHODS

IV. DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Questionnaire for Teachers

Figure 1Teacher experience

Knowledge of marking scheme(s) [Teachers]

Effectiveness of marking schemes in instruction [Teachers]

Figure 2 Effectiveness of marking schemes in instruction

Benefit(s) of using marking scheme as a teaching technique/tool in Commerce

Use of marking schemes [Teachers]

Figure 3 Frequency of use of marking schemes

Challenges encountered in using marking scheme

Marking scheme(s) versus Good quality results

Questionnaire for pupils

Findings from Interviews

Findings from Observations

APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

2. How long have you been in the teaching field?

3. Do you understand what is meant by marking scheme(s)?

If yes briefly explain

Explain the reason why

6. Do you employ marking scheme in your day to day teaching?

If yes how often?

INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWEES (TEACHERS)

APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PUPILS

INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR PUPILS

S-ar putea să vă placă și