Crossman, J. (2007). The role of relationships and emotions in student perceptions of learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(3), 313-327.

Deneen, C. C., & Boud, D. (2013). Patterns of resistance in managing assessment change. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 577-591.

Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., & Smith, J. K. (2017). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In G. T. L. Brown, & L. R. Harris (Eds.), The handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169-185). New York: Routledge.

Pekrun, R., Cusack, A., Murayama, K., Elliot, A. J., & Thomas, K. (2014). The power of anticipated feedback: Effects on students' achievement goals and achievement emotions. Learning and Instruction, 29, 115-124.

Steinberg, C. (2008). Assessment as emotional practice. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 7(3), 42-64.

Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., and Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback, in G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of Human and Social Conditions in Assessment (pp. 169-185), New York: Routledge.

The authors reviewed various models of formative feedback asking when, where and how it works. Bringing together extant literature, they show the complexity and deep practical knowledge needed by teachers required for effective assessment practice and orchestrating the learning experience in ways that are productive for developing self-regulated learners.

Steinberg, C. (2008). Assessment as an “emotional practice”. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 7(3), 42-64.

The intention of this article is to illustrate how assessment is an “emotional practice” (Hargreaves, 1998) for teachers and how paying attention to the emotions involved can provide useful information about assessment practices to teachers, teacher-educators and policy-reformers. Through presenting a review of research literature it makes three main points. Firstly, assessment decisions are not “neutral” but involve teachers’ emotions, which are interwoven with their beliefs. Secondly, standardised assessment generates intensely negative emotions in teachers which limit their effectiveness, while accountability practices can evoke undesirable emotions which undermine the purposes of schooling. Thirdly, formative assessment and accountability through standardised assessment are governed by conflicting emotional rules, which inevitably generate confusion in practice. It concludes by calling for further research so as to better understand the multiple ways in which assessment is an “emotional practice”.