The use and influence of supervisor marking in graduate research project assessment: a scoping review

Undergraduate and postgraduate degree research programs play an important role in building research capacity. There is a need to explore how graduate research projects are assessed, and the supervisor influence when involved in summative assessment. This scoping review synthesises evidence regarding the methods used of graduate research project assessment and the influence supervisor marking. A comprehensive literature search across six electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, EBSCOhost, and LILACS Virtual Health Library) was conducted for published reports until April 2025. Data were extracted to capture study characteristics, assessment methods used, challenges and benefits of supervisor marking and recommendations regarding supervisor marking. The analysis of 11 studies from different contexts revealed significant variation in institutional practices and perspectives, with ongoing debates about the benefits of incorporating supervisor expertise versus concerns about marking bias. The findings highlight various methods used to assess exit level outcomes, namely thesis assessment, an oral examination and research process skills assessment. The evidence suggests differentiation in supervisor marking for summative assessment of the thesis at undergraduate and postgraduate levels; however, the supervisor plays a significant role in formative assessment to achieve learning outcomes. More research and guidance are needed to guide best practice research project assessment.