Rating writing: Comparison of holistic and analytic grading approaches in pre-service teachers

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Carolina Lopera-Oquendo , Anastasiya A. Lipnevich , Ignacio Mañez
{"title":"Rating writing: Comparison of holistic and analytic grading approaches in pre-service teachers","authors":"Carolina Lopera-Oquendo ,&nbsp;Anastasiya A. Lipnevich ,&nbsp;Ignacio Mañez","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In a typical instructional setting, teachers are responsible for making ongoing decisions that involve judgments of students’ capabilities, knowledge, learning needs, and progress toward a certain pre-specified goal. However, there is a significant within-teacher as well as a great between-teacher variability in the actual determination of grades. Grades appear to be an amalgam of characteristics of a student, filtered through a range of teacher personality variables.</p></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which pre-service teachers agreed on students’ grades in writing task between holistic and analytic grading approaches and how their individual characteristics and beliefs about features of assessment explained the variability in grading practices.</p></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><p>Teacher candidates (N = 231, 65% female) enrolled in a training program in 2020 and 2021 cohorts at the University of València, Spain, were asked to read two essays, identified by experts as being of low and high quality, and assign holistic and analytic grades.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>although teacher candidates provided grades consistently across the two approaches (intra-individual differences), there was a high variability in the distribution among participants (inter-individual differences). We found that, gender, area of specialization, attitudes toward feedback, and extraversion were significant predictors of grading variability.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study highlights the considerable variation in grading practices among pre-service teachers, indicating the influence of individual factors such as gender, specialization, feedback receptivity, and extraversion. Despite consistent grading within specific approaches, the inter-individual differences in scores were substantial. Due to the consequential nature of teacher grades, our findings offer important insights and have critical implications for teacher preparation and professional development programs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 101992"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224001191","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In a typical instructional setting, teachers are responsible for making ongoing decisions that involve judgments of students’ capabilities, knowledge, learning needs, and progress toward a certain pre-specified goal. However, there is a significant within-teacher as well as a great between-teacher variability in the actual determination of grades. Grades appear to be an amalgam of characteristics of a student, filtered through a range of teacher personality variables.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which pre-service teachers agreed on students’ grades in writing task between holistic and analytic grading approaches and how their individual characteristics and beliefs about features of assessment explained the variability in grading practices.

Sample

Teacher candidates (N = 231, 65% female) enrolled in a training program in 2020 and 2021 cohorts at the University of València, Spain, were asked to read two essays, identified by experts as being of low and high quality, and assign holistic and analytic grades.

Results

although teacher candidates provided grades consistently across the two approaches (intra-individual differences), there was a high variability in the distribution among participants (inter-individual differences). We found that, gender, area of specialization, attitudes toward feedback, and extraversion were significant predictors of grading variability.

Conclusion

This study highlights the considerable variation in grading practices among pre-service teachers, indicating the influence of individual factors such as gender, specialization, feedback receptivity, and extraversion. Despite consistent grading within specific approaches, the inter-individual differences in scores were substantial. Due to the consequential nature of teacher grades, our findings offer important insights and have critical implications for teacher preparation and professional development programs.

给写作评分:职前教师整体评分法与分析评分法的比较
背景在典型的教学环境中,教师负责对学生的能力、知识、学习需求以及在实现某个预先指定目标方面的进展情况作出持续的判断。然而,在实际确定成绩的过程中,教师内部和教师之间的差异都很大。本研究的目的是调查职前教师在整体评分法和分析评分法之间对学生写作任务成绩的认同程度,以及他们的个人特点和对评价特点的信念如何解释评分实践中的差异。样本西班牙瓦伦西亚大学(University of València)2020 年和 2021 年入学的师范生(N = 231,65% 为女性)被要求阅读两篇被专家认定为低质量和高质量的作文,并给出整体评分和分析评分。我们发现,性别、专业领域、对反馈的态度和外向性是评分差异的重要预测因素。结论这项研究凸显了职前教师在评分实践中的巨大差异,表明性别、专业领域、反馈接受能力和外向性等个体因素的影响。尽管在特定的方法中评分是一致的,但个体间的分数差异很大。由于教师评分的后果性,我们的研究结果提供了重要的见解,并对教师准备和专业发展计划具有重要意义。
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
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
×
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