Uncovering the pedagogical decision-making processes of 581 higher education faculty members: How they balance fairness, inclusivity, and structural constraints.
Ucan, S., Yıldırım Hoş, H., Karataş, İ. H., & Bülbül, Y. (2025). Faculty Assessment Choices in Higher Education: Drivers, Strategies, and Decision‑Making Styles for Fair and Inclusive Practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 50, (8), 1344-1359.
To investigate the factors influencing assessment selection, strategies for fairness/inclusion, and the decision-making styles underpinning these processes.
A qualitative survey administered to 581 faculty members across twelve diverse faculties. Data was analyzed thematically to identify core drivers and styles.
Choices are driven by alignment with learning outcomes (Rational), learner characteristics (Intuitive), and structural constraints (Bounded Rational), often balancing ideals with practicality.
Faculty exhibit diverse styles: Rational (systematic), Bounded Rational (satisficing), Intuitive (experience-based), and Dependent (policy-driven).
Adjust the environmental constraints below to see how they influence the Decision-Making Style according to the study's findings on faculty behavior.
Systematic analysis of "Course Attributes" (Content/Objectives) to select the most valid measurement tool.
Driven by Course Attributes. Faculty systematically analyze course content and objectives to select the most valid measurement tool, often using rubrics for fairness.
Driven by Structural Conditions. Constraints like high workload or large classes force "satisficing" solutions (e.g., multiple-choice) to make assessment feasible.
Driven by Learner Characteristics. Decisions rely on experience and a feel for student engagement, often leading to flexible, student-focused adaptations.
Driven by Authority Alignment. Faculty rely on institutional rules, departmental norms, or external accreditation bodies to determine assessments.