Dergiler / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

Gathering evidence on e-rubrics: Perspectives and many facet Rasch analysis of rating behavior

Sayfa
454–474
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The findings of the qualitative and quantitative strands are overlapping, and the responses elicited from the participants seem to shed some light on the rating behavior of the writing faculty.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study examined the faculty perspectives towards the use of electronic rubrics and their rating behavior in a freshman composition course.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The data for faculty perspectives were collected from nine instructors through semi-structured interviews and for their behavior, six instructors teaching the same course in Fall 2019, shared their students’ essay scores with the researchers.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The findings of the qualitative and quantitative strands are overlapping, and the responses elicited from the participants seem to shed some light on the rating behavior of the writing faculty.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:2019 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Freshman composition · Electronic rubric · Many Facet Rasch Model

Özet

This study examined the faculty perspectives towards the use of electronic rubrics and their rating behavior in a freshman composition course. A mixed-methods approach has been employed for data collection and analysis. The data for faculty perspectives were collected from nine instructors through semi-structured interviews and for their behavior, six instructors teaching the same course in Fall 2019, shared their students’ essay scores with the researchers. Many facet Rasch model (MFRM) was employed for quantitative data analysis. According to the findings of the quantitative data, the instructors differed in their degree of leniency and severity, one instructor being more lenient and one being more severe than the others. Another interesting finding was one instructor turned out to be an inconsistent user of the e-rubric. The findings of the qualitative data showed that writing faculty think e-rubrics come with great advantages such as facilitating scoring, ensuring standardization, and reducing student complaints and grade appeals. However, they view the impact of e-rubrics on student writing with cautious optimism. The findings of the qualitative and quantitative strands are overlapping, and the responses elicited from the participants seem to shed some light on the rating behavior of the writing faculty.

Abstract

This study examined the faculty perspectives towards the use of electronic rubrics and their rating behavior in a freshman composition course. A mixed-methods approach has been employed for data collection and analysis. The data for faculty perspectives were collected from nine instructors through semi-structured interviews and for their behavior, six instructors teaching the same course in Fall 2019, shared their students’ essay scores with the researchers. Many facet Rasch model (MFRM) was employed for quantitative data analysis. According to the findings of the quantitative data, the instructors differed in their degree of leniency and severity, one instructor being more lenient and one being more severe than the others. Another interesting finding was one instructor turned out to be an inconsistent user of the e-rubric. The findings of the qualitative data showed that writing faculty think e-rubrics come with great advantages such as facilitating scoring, ensuring standardization, and reducing student complaints and grade appeals. However, they view the impact of e-rubrics on student writing with cautious optimism. The findings of the qualitative and quantitative strands are overlapping, and the responses elicited from the participants seem to shed some light on the rating behavior of the writing faculty.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ERGUVAN, İ. D., DÜNYA, B. A. (2022). Gathering evidence on e-rubrics: Perspectives and many facet Rasch analysis of rating behavior. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 454–474. https://ajindex.com/articles/540090

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2006). Rubrics: tools for making learning goals and evaluation criteria explicit for both teachers and learners. CBE Life Sciences Education, 5(3), 197-203. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-06-0168
  2. Andrade, H.G. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57(5), 13-18.
  3. Andrade, H. G. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.27-31
  4. Anglin, L. Anglin, K., Schumann, P.L., & Kalinski, J. A. (2008). Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of grading through the use of computer‐assisted grading rubrics. Decision Sciences: Journal of Innovative Education, 6(1), 51 73. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2007.00153.x
  5. Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Corwin Press.
  6. Atkinson, D. & Lim, S.L. (2013). Improving assessment processes in higher education: Student and teacher perceptions of the effectiveness of a rubric embedded in a LMS. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(5), 651-666. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.526
  7. Broad, B. (2000). Pulling your hair out: "Crises of standardization in communal writing assessment". Research in the Teaching of English, 35(2), 213 260. www.jstor.org/stable/40171515 Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading. ASCD. Brookhart, S. M. (2018). Appropriate criteria: Key to effective rubrics. Frontiers in Education, 3. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2018.00022/full
  8. Brookhart, S. M., & Chen, F. (2015). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review, 67(3), 343-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2014.929565
  9. Brown, J. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge University Press.
  10. Carr, N. T. (2000). A comparison of the effects of analytic and holistic rating scale types in the context of composition tests. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 207-241 https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4dw4z8rt
  11. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). SAGE. Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2011). Choosing a mixed methods design. In Designing and conducting mixed