AB  - This paper examines the use of rubrics to support peer assessment and feedback literacy in a large postgraduate cohort of over 210 students at an Australian university. Drawing on reflective practitioner inquiry, it explores how an analytic feedback rubric designed primarily as a feedback tool rather than a marking guide was deployed to scaffold peer assessment within a major group project. Three interrelated challenges are documented: inconsistent criterion application, surface-level compliance among a quarter of students, and affective barriers for culturally diverse learners. The paper reports on iterative adaptations, including co-developed rubric language and calibration activities, and reflects on their effectiveness. It argues that rubrics are necessary but insufficient for sustainable feedback at scale, and that their effectiveness depends on deliberate pedagogical scaffolding. The findings suggest that sustainable feedback at scale requires to be treated as dialogic tools rather than static artefacts.
AU  - Atif, A
DA  - 2026/06/12
DO  - 10.5281/zenodo.20606982
JO  - Pedagogy for Higher Education Large Classes
PY  - 2026/06/12
TI  - Scaling Up or Scaling Down? Rubrics, Peer Assessment and Feedback Literacy in a Large Postgraduate Cohort
Y1  - 2026/06/12
Y2  - 2026/06/27
ER  -