Cost and Benefit of a Computer Supported Real Time Delphi Method on Inter-Rater Reliability Using Rubrics in Highly Subjective Evaluation Tasks

Jorge J. Villalón, A. Beghelli, Jose Merino
{"title":"Cost and Benefit of a Computer Supported Real Time Delphi Method on Inter-Rater Reliability Using Rubrics in Highly Subjective Evaluation Tasks","authors":"Jorge J. Villalón, A. Beghelli, Jose Merino","doi":"10.1109/ICALT.2016.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we evaluate the impact that a Computer Supported Collaborative Marking (CSCM) system has on the marking process of a highly subjective judging task. To do so, we evaluated the inter-rater reliability of reviewers in charge of marking written essays and the time required to perform such task. We analyzed the results of two groups of markers: the experimental group first marked 5 essays in a collaborative way (using the CSCM system, aiming to reach consensus) and the control group marked the same set of essays in a cooperative manner (e.g. separately). Next, both groups corrected the remaining 20 essays in a cooperative way. Results show that the CSCM system was effective in providing a collaborative environment, with a higher inter-rater agreement as a result (3 times higher than the values obtained by the control group), but at the expense of 2.5 times higher average marking time. When the experimental group returned to mark in a cooperative way, the benefit of inter-rater agreement was practically lost but the time to mark was 65% lower than the control group, showing an immediate benefit of the first collaborative effort in the efficiency of the mechanics of marking.","PeriodicalId":188900,"journal":{"name":"2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT)","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2016.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this paper we evaluate the impact that a Computer Supported Collaborative Marking (CSCM) system has on the marking process of a highly subjective judging task. To do so, we evaluated the inter-rater reliability of reviewers in charge of marking written essays and the time required to perform such task. We analyzed the results of two groups of markers: the experimental group first marked 5 essays in a collaborative way (using the CSCM system, aiming to reach consensus) and the control group marked the same set of essays in a cooperative manner (e.g. separately). Next, both groups corrected the remaining 20 essays in a cooperative way. Results show that the CSCM system was effective in providing a collaborative environment, with a higher inter-rater agreement as a result (3 times higher than the values obtained by the control group), but at the expense of 2.5 times higher average marking time. When the experimental group returned to mark in a cooperative way, the benefit of inter-rater agreement was practically lost but the time to mark was 65% lower than the control group, showing an immediate benefit of the first collaborative effort in the efficiency of the mechanics of marking.
在高度主观的评价任务中使用规则的计算机支持的实时德尔菲法的成本和效益
在本文中,我们评估了计算机支持的协同阅卷(CSCM)系统对高度主观评判任务的阅卷过程的影响。为此,我们评估了负责给书面文章打分的审稿人的内部可靠性,以及完成这项任务所需的时间。我们分析了两组阅卷的结果:实验组首先以协作方式阅卷5篇文章(使用CSCM系统,以达成共识为目的),对照组以合作方式阅卷同一组文章(如分别阅卷)。接下来,两组以合作的方式修改剩下的20篇作文。结果表明,CSCM系统在提供协作环境方面是有效的,因此评分者之间的一致性更高(比对照组高3倍),但以平均评分时间高2.5倍为代价。当实验组以合作的方式重新开始打分时,评分者之间达成一致的好处实际上已经失去了,但打分的时间比对照组少了65%,这表明第一次合作努力在打分机制的效率方面产生了直接的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信