Gender-inclusive assessment design (GIAD): A scoping review

Abstract

This scoping review synthesizes scholarship on gender-inclusive assessment design (GIAD) in UK higher education and transnational education, (TNE), with a focus on authorial stance/voice, assessment genre (essay vs report), and lecturer positionality. Using a PRISMA ScR–aligned approach and a Population–Concept–Context (PCC) frame, searches of Scopus, Web of Science, and EBSCO (1998-2025) identified 504 records; 41 sources were included for analysis. Consistent with scoping review aims, no study quality appraisal or meta-analysis was undertaken. Literature consistently reports gendered discourse features in student writing (e.g., first-person usage, hedging, stance adoption) and suggests possible effects of marker expectations yet rarely translates these insights into operational assessment choices that could mitigate gendered disadvantage. Notably, it was found that no recent comparative studies evaluate performance consequences of essay vs report formats by gender, underscoring a critical evidence gap in prevalent genres. First-person permissions emerge as a plausible equity lever where third-person conventions dominate, particularly in business/management programmes. To address these gaps, the review consolidates prior work into five GIAD design levers: genre clarity and stance permissions; outcome sequencing (conclusions first vs last); first-person allowance; brief translation with structured peer feedback cycles; and transfer oriented prompts. The review offers theoretical consolidation, a methodological agenda for quasi experimental and multi-site trials, and practical quality assurance artefacts implementable within routine assurance of learning cycles across home and branch campus delivery.

Keywords

• Gender-inclusive assessment design
• First-person writing
• Assessment genre
• Higher education
• Transnational education

References

1. Aiston, S.J., & Fo, C.K. (2021). The silence/ing of academic women. Gender and Education, 33(2), 138-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2020.1716955
2. Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Boud, D., & Jorre de St Jorre, T. (Eds.). (2022). Assessment for inclusion in higher education: Promoting equity and social justice in assessment. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003293101
3. Alkhaled, S., Stead, V., & Li, Y. (2021). The guide to developing a gender aware and inclusive curriculum. Lancaster University Management School. https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/lums/research/LUMSGenderAwareCurriculum.pdf
4. Aneja A (2017) Blending in: Reconciling feminist pedagogy and distance education across cultures. Gender and Education, 29(7): 850-868. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1237621
5. Annabi, C.A., McStay, A.L., Noble, A.F., & Sidahmed, M. (2018). Engaging with arranged marriages: A lesson for transnational higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(2), 284-297. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2017-0065
6. Annabi, C.A., & Wilkins, S. (2016). The use of MOOCs in transnational higher education for accreditation of prior learning, programme delivery, and professional development. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2015-0057
7. Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19 32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
8. Bain, K. (2023). Inclusive assessment in higher education: What does the literature tell us on how to define and design inclusive assessments? Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (27), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi27.1014

9. Barmes, L. (2023). Silencing at work: Sexual harassment, workplace misconduct and NDAs. Industrial Law Journal, 52(1), 68-106. https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwac007
10. Baron, N.S. (2002). Alphabet to email: How written English evolved and where it's heading. Routledge.
11. Bates, S., Clapton, J., & Coren, E. (2007). Systematic maps to support the evidence base in social care. Evidence & Policy, 3(4), 539-551.
12. Biggs, J. (2015). Teaching for desired learning outcomes. In Handbook of educational ideas and practices (Routledge Revivals) (pp. 681-693). Routledge.
13. Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610295
14. Boettger, R.K., & Wulff, S. (2019). Gender effects in student technical and scientific Writing-A corpus-based study. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 62(3), 239 252. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2019.2920029
15. Boud, D., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Bennett, S., Joughin, G., & Molloy, E. (2018). Reframing assessment research: Through a practice perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 43(7), 1107-1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1202913
16. Bragge, P., Clavisi, O., Turner, T., Tavender, E., Collie, A., & Gruen, R.L. (2011). The global evidence mapping initiative: scoping research in broad topic areas. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-92
17. Brennan, E.B. (2024). “I” versus “the author”: The power of first-person voice when writing about science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(22), Article e2316966121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2316966121
18. Butterfield, E.C., & Nelson, G.D. (1989). Theory and practice of teaching for transfer. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(3), 5-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299054
19. Chafe, W., & Tannen, D. (1987). The relation between written and spoken language. Annual review of anthropology, 16, 383-407.
20. Chapin, J., & Warne, V. (2020). Gender responsive pedagogy in higher education: A framework. International Network for International Network for Advancing Science and Policy.
21. Chatterjee, S., & Barber, K. (2021). Between ‘here-now ‘and ‘there-then’: The West and Asia’s colonial entanglements in international higher education. Higher Education, 81(2), 221-239.
22. Chitnev, V. (2019). University assessment practices through a lens of feminist pedagogy [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Victoria. https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/bitstream/handle/1828/11338/Chitnev_Veta_PhD_2019.pdf
23. Clarke, E. (2024). Voices from the edge: Girls' experiences of being at risk of permanent exclusion. British Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 855-875. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3956
24. Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT). (n.d.). International Campuses. Retrieved January 11, 2026, from https://www.cbert.org/intl-campus
25. Day, S.B., & Goldstone, R.L. (2012). The import of knowledge export: Connecting findings and theories of transfer of learning. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 153-176.
26. Day, C., Kington, A., Stobart, G., & Sammons, P. (2006). The personal and professional selves of teachers: Stable and unstable identities. British Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 601-616.
27. Department for Education, & Department for International Trade. (2019). International education strategy: Global potential, global growth [Policy Paper]. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-education-strategy-global-potential-global-growth
28. Ding, D.D. (2002). The passive voice and social values in science. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32(2), 137-154.
29. Fleischman, S. (1999). I am..., I have..., I suffer from...: A linguist reflects on the language of illness and disease. Journal of Medical Humanities, 20, 3-32.
30. Francis, B., Robson, J., & Read, B. (2001). An analysis of undergraduate writing styles in the context of gender and achievement. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 313-326.
31. Green, J.H. (2013). Transfer of learning and its ascendancy in higher education: A cultural critique. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 365-376.
32. Gonzales, L. D., Gong, R. H., Miao, S., & Surla, K. (2023). Women academics, identity capitalism, and the imperative of transformation. In L. Leišytė, J.R. Dee & B.J.R. van der Meulen (Eds.), Research handbook on the transformation of higher education (pp. 255 267). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800378216.00026
33. Healy, S., Walaszczyk, J., Martins, M.D.L., Fonseca, P., Buss, C., & Rabat, A. (2025). Facilitating global virtual exchange: Insights from a feminist perspective. Research in Comparative and International Education, 20(1), 69-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/17454999241301611
34. Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2006). The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research “with” rather than “on” people. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research (pp. 144-154). SAGE Publications.
35. Hofstede, G. (1998). Masculinity and femininity: The taboo dimension of national cultures (Vol. 3). Sage.
36. Ishikawa, Y. (2015). Gender differences in vocabulary use in essay writing by university students. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 192, 593 600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.078
37. Jiang, F., & Hyland, K. (2023). Changes in research abstracts: Past tense, third-person, passive, and negatives. Written Communication, 40(1), 210-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883221128876
38. Jones, R.H. (2020). Creativity in language learning and teaching: Translingual practices and transcultural identities. Applied Linguistics Review, 11(4), 535-550.
39. Kitchener, M., & Humbert, A.L. (Eds.). (2022). Handbook for creating a gender-sensitive curriculum: Teaching and learning strategies. Brookes University.
40. Kristiansen, G. (2008). Style-shifting and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal variation. In G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Ed.), Cognitive sociolinguistics: language variation, cultural models, social systems (pp. 45-90). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199154.1.45
41. Koseoglu, S., Ozturk, T., Ucar, H., Karahan, E., & Bozkurt, A. (2020). 30 years of gender inequality and implications on curriculum design in open and distance learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2020(1), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.553
42. Larsen Freeman, D. (2013). Transfer of learning transformed. Language Learning, 63, 107 129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00740.x
43. Lea, M.R., & Street, B.V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.
44. Lehner-Mear, R., Dixon, K., Xu, Y., Gripton, C., & Cooker, L. (2026). Gender as an issue of curricular (in)justice: A review of national early childhood education curriculum documents in England from 1996 to 2021. The Curriculum Journal, 37, 88-106. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.326
45. Leong, A.P. (2020). The passive voice in scientific writing through the ages: A diachronic study. Text & Talk, 40(4), 467-489. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-2066
46. Lomer, S. (2017). Soft power as a policy rationale for international education in the UK: A critical analysis. Higher Education, 74(4), 581-598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0060-6
47. Lukač, M., & Heyd, T. (2023). Grassroots prescriptivism. In J.C. Beal, M. Lukač & R. Straaijer (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of linguistic prescriptivism (pp. 227 245). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003095125
48. Marsen, S. (2019). Professional writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.
49. MacKenzie, A., & Maginess, T. (2018). Achieving moralised compassion in higher education. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 6(3), 42-48. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v6i3.370
50. Mateos-González, J.L., & Wakeling, P. (2022). Exploring socioeconomic inequalities and access to elite postgraduate education among English graduates. Higher Education, 83(3), 673-694.
51. Mays, N., Roberts, E., & Popay, J. (2001). Synthesizing research evidence. In N. Fulop, P. Allen, A. Clarke & N. Black (Eds.), Studying the organisation and delivery of health services: Research methods (pp. 188-219). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203481981-16
52. Miller, C., & Morrison, J. (2025). Feminist pedagogy within constraints: teaching reflective writing in a UK higher education institution. Gender and Education, 37(6), 653 669. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2025.2508761
53. Mitchell, K.M. (2017). Academic voice: On feminism, presence, and objectivity in writing. Nursing Inquiry, 24(4), Article e12200. https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12200
54. Mortimore, P. (2000). Does educational research matter? British Educational Research Journal, 26(1), 5-24.
55. Munn, Z., Peters, M.D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, Article 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
56. Murphy, R. (2025, May 9). Are the UK universities failing financially. Tax Research UK Blog. https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/05/09/are the uks universities failing financially/#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%2040%25%20of%20all,the%20way%20that%20they%20are.
57. Nelson, N., & Castelló, M. (2012). Academic writing and authorial voice. In M. Castelló & C. Donahue (Eds.), University writing: Selves and texts in academic societies (pp. 33–51). Brill Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/9781780523873_004
58. Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S.K., Taghizadeh Kerman, N., Parvaneh Akhteh Khaneh, M., Babaee, M., Ashrafi, H., & Biemans, H.J. (2023). Gender differences in students’ argumentative essay writing, peer review performance and uptake in online learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(10), 6302-6316. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2034887
59. Office for Students. (n.d.). Student numbers for regulatory purposes. Retrieved January 11, 2026, from https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/data and analysis/student numbers for regulatory purposes/get-the-current-student-numbers-data/
60. Paxton, M. (2012). Student voice as a methodological issue in academic literacies research. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(3), 381 391. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.634382
61. Pérez-Sabater, C. (2021). Moments of sharing, language style and resources for solidarity on social media: A comparative analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 180, 266 282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.034
62. Pollock, D., Davies, E.L., Peters, M.D.J., Tricco, A.C., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C.M., Khalil, H., & Munn, Z. (2021). Undertaking a scoping review: A practical guide for nursing and midwifery students, clinicians, researchers, and academics. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(4), 2102-2113. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14743
63. Rahman, M.A. (2024). Gender bias in academic writing: Challenges and equity strategies. Muadalah, 12(1), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.18592/muadalah.v12i1.12543
64. Read, B. (2025). Gender equity in academic knowledge production: the influence of politics, power and precarity. European Educational Research Journal, 24(3), 394 407. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041241277932
65. Read, B., Robson, J., & Francis, B. (2004). Re-viewing undergraduate writing: tutors' perceptions of essay qualities according to gender. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 9(2), 217-238.
66. Sarkis-Onofre, R., Catalá-López, F., Aromataris, E., & Lockwood, C. (2021). How to properly use the PRISMA Statement. Systematic reviews, 10(1), 117. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01671-z
67. Schön, D. (1983). Becoming a reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Temple Smith. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473
68. Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
69. Simon, E. (2021). The different language use between male and female. Lectio: Journal of Language and Language Teaching, 1(1), 13-18.
70. Soysal, Y.N., & Baltaru, R.D. (2021). University as the producer of knowledge, and economic and societal value: The 20th and twenty-first century transformations of the UK higher education system. European Journal of Higher Education, 11(3), 312-328.
71. Stock, I., & Eik-Nes, N.L. (2016). Voice features in academic texts: A review of empirical studies. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 24, 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.12.006
72. Sullivan, V., Coles, L., Xu, Y., & Thorpe, K. (2023). Men times ten: Does the presence of more men support inclusion of male educators in early childhood education and care? Gender and Education, 35(1), 18-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2022.2137106
73. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in Conversation. Ballantine Books.
74. Tricco, A.C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K.K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M.D.J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E.A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M.G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., … Straus, S.E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467-473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
75. United Nations (2025). The sustainable development goals report. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2025/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2025.pdf
76. United Nations Development Programme. (2023). Gender Social Norms Index (GSNI): Breaking down gender biases: Shifting social norms towards gender equality. https://hdr.undp.org/content/2023-gender-social-norms-index-gsni
77. Universities UK. (n.d.). Higher education in numbers. Retrieved January 11, 2026, from https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/latest/insights-and-analysis/higher-education-numbers
78. Vaher, A. (2021). The use of first-person pronoun in academic texts. [Unpublished Bachelor’s dissertation]. University of Tartu. https://dspace.ut.ee/server/api/core/bitstreams/5d14883f-b6e7-44c6-9677-07564d930132/content
79. Wakerkwa, D.A.P. (2023). Being involved or informative: Gender differences in the use of pronouns and specifiers in writing conclusions. Leksema: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 8(1), 1-11.
80. Wenjing, X. (2012). Study on gender differences in English. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education Technology and Management Engineering (pp. 218–221).
81. Wilkins, S., & Annabi, C.A. (2023). Academic careers in transnational higher education: The rewards and challenges of teaching at international branch campuses. Journal of Studies in International Education, 27(2), 219-239. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153211052782
82. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
83. Winkelmes, M.A., Bernacki, M., Butler, J., Zochowski, M., Golanics, J., & Weavil, K.H. (2016). A teaching intervention that increases underserved college students' success. Peer Review, 18, 31-36.
84. Zhang, M., Bennett, R.E., Deane, P., & van Rijn, P.W. (2019). Are there gender differences in how students write their essays? An analysis of writing processes. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38(2), 14-26.