Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2022 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

Investigating the Impact of Rater Training on Rater Errors in the Process of Assessing Writing Skill

Pages
492–514
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

When the findings of the study were examined, it was found that the control and experimental groups were similar to each other before the experiment, however, after the experimental process, the study group made more valid and reliable measurements.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the process of measuring and assessing high-level cognitive skills, interference of rater errors in measurements brings about a constant concern and low objectivity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The main purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of rater training on rater errors in the process of assessing individual performance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the findings of the study were examined, it was found that the control and experimental groups were similar to each other before the experiment, however, after the experimental process, the study group made more valid and reliable measurements.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Rater training · Rater errors · Many facet Rasch model

Abstract

In the process of measuring and assessing high-level cognitive skills, interference of rater errors in measurements brings about a constant concern and low objectivity. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of rater training on rater errors in the process of assessing individual performance. The study was conducted with a pretest-posttest control group quasi-experimental design. In this research, 45 raters were employed, 23 from the control group and 22 from the experimental group. As data collection tools, a writing task that was developed by IELTS and an analytical rubric that was developed to assess academic writing skills were used. As part of the experimental procedure, rater training was provided and this training was implemented by combining rater error training and frame of reference training. When the findings of the study were examined, it was found that the control and experimental groups were similar to each other before the experiment, however, after the experimental process, the study group made more valid and reliable measurements. As a result, it was investigated that the rater training given had an impact on rater errors such as rater severity, rater leniency, central tendency, and Halo effect. Based on the obtained findings, some suggestions were offered for researchers and future studies.

Özet

In the process of measuring and assessing high-level cognitive skills, interference of rater errors in measurements brings about a constant concern and low objectivity. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of rater training on rater errors in the process of assessing individual performance. The study was conducted with a pretest-posttest control group quasi-experimental design. In this research, 45 raters were employed, 23 from the control group and 22 from the experimental group. As data collection tools, a writing task that was developed by IELTS and an analytical rubric that was developed to assess academic writing skills were used. As part of the experimental procedure, rater training was provided and this training was implemented by combining rater error training and frame of reference training. When the findings of the study were examined, it was found that the control and experimental groups were similar to each other before the experiment, however, after the experimental process, the study group made more valid and reliable measurements. As a result, it was investigated that the rater training given had an impact on rater errors such as rater severity, rater leniency, central tendency, and Halo effect. Based on the obtained findings, some suggestions were offered for researchers and future studies.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞATA, M., KARAKAYA, İ. (2022). Investigating the Impact of Rater Training on Rater Errors in the Process of Assessing Writing Skill. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 492–514. https://ajindex.com/articles/540008

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Abu Kassim, N.L. (2011). Judging behaviour and rater errors: an application of the many-facet Rasch model. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 11(3), 179-197.
  2. Abu Kassim, N.L. (2007). Exploring rater judging behaviour using the many-facet Rasch model. Paper Presented in the Second Biennial International Conference on Teaching and Learning of English in Asia: Exploring New Frontiers (TELiA2), Universiti Utara, Malaysia. Aguinis, H., Mazurkiewicz, M.D., & Heggestad, E.D. (2009). Using web‐based frame‐of‐reference training to decrease biases in personality‐based job analysis: An experimental field study. Personnel Psychology, 62(2), 405-438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01144.x
  3. Athey, T.R., & McIntyre, R.M. (1987). Effect of rater training on rater accuracy: Levels–of–processing theory and social facilitation theory perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 567–572. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.567
  4. Attali, Y., Bridgeman, B., & Trapani, C. (2010). Performance of a generic approach in automated essay scoring. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 10(3), 1-16.
  5. Baird, J.A., Hayes, M., Johnson, R., Johnson, S., & Lamprianou, I. (2013). Marker effects and examination reliability. A Comparative exploration from the perspectives of generalisability theory, Rash model and multilevel modelling. Oxford: University of Oxford for Educational Assessment. Bennet, J. (1998). Human resources management. Singapore: Prentice Hall. Bernardin, H.J. (1978). Effects of rater training on leniency and halo errors in student ratings of instructors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 301 308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.3.301
  6. Bernardin, H.J., & Buckley, M.R. (1981). Strategies in rater training. Academy of Management Review, 6(2), 205-212.
  7. Bernardin, H.J. & Pence, E.C. (1980). Effects of rater training: New response sets and decreasing accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 60 66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.1.60
  8. Bijani, H. (2018). Investigating the validity of oral assessment rater training program: A mixed-methods study of raters’ perceptions and attitudes before and after training. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1460901
  9. Bond, T., & Fox, C.M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315814698
  10. Borman, W.C. (1975). Effects of instructions to avoid halo error on reliability and validity of performanc