Journals / Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2

Rating Performance among Raters of Different Experience Through Multi-Facet Rasch Measurement (MFRM) Model

Pages
147–162
Publication Date
2020-06-13
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The present study provides additional evidence with respect to the role of rating experience in inspiring raters to provide accurate ratings.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:One’s experience can greatly contribute to a diversified rating performance in educational scoring.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of the study is to examine raters’ rating performance in assessing oral tests among lower secondary school students using Multi-facet Rasch Measurement (MFRM) model indicated by raters’ severity.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The present study provides additional evidence with respect to the role of rating experience in inspiring raters to provide accurate ratings.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:rating performance · rater-mediated assessment · Multi-faceted Rasch Measurement model

Abstract

One’s experience can greatly contribute to a diversified rating performance in educational scoring. Heterogeneous ratings can negatively affect examinees’ results. The aim of the study is to examine raters’ rating performance in assessing oral tests among lower secondary school students using Multi-facet Rasch Measurement (MFRM) model indicated by raters’ severity. Respondents are thirty English Language teachers clustered into two groups based on their rating experience in high-stakes assessment. The respondents listened to ten examinees’ recorded answers of three oral test items and provided their ratings. Instruments include items, examinees’ answers, scoring rubric, and scoring sheet used to appraise examinees’ competence in three domains which are vocabulary, grammar, and communicative competence. MFRM analysis showed that raters exhibited diversity in their severity level with chi-square χ2=2.661. Raters’ severity measures ranged from 2.13 to -1.45 logits. Independent t-test indicated that there was a significant difference in ratings provided by the inexperienced and the experienced raters, t-value = -0.96, df = 28, p<0.01. The findings of this study suggest that assessment developers must ensure raters are well versed before they can rate examinees in operational settings gained through assessment practices or rater training. Further research is needed to account for the varying effects of rating experience in other assessment contexts and the effects of interaction between facets on estimates of examinees’ measures. The present study provides additional evidence with respect to the role of rating experience in inspiring raters to provide accurate ratings.

🔖

Cite This Article

NOH, M. F. M., MATORE, M. E. E. M. (2020). Rating Performance among Raters of Different Experience Through Multi-Facet Rasch Measurement (MFRM) Model. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2, 147–162. https://ajindex.com/articles/137261

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Ahmadi Shirazi, M. (2019). For a greater good: Bias analysis in writing assessment. SAGE Open, 9(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018822377
  2. Albano, A. D., & Rodrigues, M. (2018). Item development research and practice. Handbook of Accessible Instruction and Testing Practices: Issues, Innovations, and Applications, 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71126-3_12
  3. Alp, P., Epner, A., & Pajupuu, H. (2018). The influence of rater empathy, age and experience on writing performance assessment. Linguistics Beyond And Within, 3(2017), 7–19. Retrieved from https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=716601
  4. Anthony, L., & Miriam, S. (2019). Drill in English Skills Practice: CEFR-Alligned Curriculum. Selangor: Oxford Fajar Attali, Y. (2016). A comparison of newly-trained and experienced raters on a standardized writing assessment. Language Testing, 33(1), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215582283
  5. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, And Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). California: Sage Publications. Davis, L. (2016). The influence of training and experience on rater performance in scoring spoken language. Language Testing, 33(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215582282
  6. Eckes, T. (2015). Introduction to Many-Facet Rasch Measurement: Analyzing and Evaluating Rater-Mediated Assessments (2nd ed.). Peter Lang. Eckes, T. (2019). Implications for rater-mediated language assessment. In Aryadoust, V., & Raquel, M. (Eds.), Quantitative Data Analysis for Language Assessment Volume I: Fundamental Techniques (pp. 153-175). London & New York: Routledge. Engelhard, G., & Wind, S. A. (2018). Invariant Measurement with Raters and Rating Scales: Rasch Models for Rater-Mediated Assessments. Routledge. New York & London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  7. Fisher, J. W. P. 2007. Rating scale instrument quality criteria. Rasch Measurement Transactions 21(1): 1095. Govindasamy, P., Salazar, M. D. C., Lerner, J., & Green, K. E. (2019). Assessing the reliability of the framework for equitable and effective teaching with the many-facet rasch model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(June), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01363
  8. Haladyna, T. M., & Rodrigues, M. C. (2013). Developing and Validating Test. New York: Routledge. Huang, L., Kubelec,