卓越偏差与评委会总结性评估的评定量表有关

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
David Corradi
{"title":"卓越偏差与评委会总结性评估的评定量表有关","authors":"David Corradi","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2022.2112653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Juries are a high-stake practice in higher education to assess complex competencies. However common, research remains behind in detailing the psychometric qualities of juries, especially when using rubrics or rating scales as an assessment tool. In this study, I analyze a case of a jury assessment (N = 191) of product development where both internal teaching staff and external judges assess and fill in an analytic rating scale. Using polytomous item response theory (IRT) analysis developed for the analysis of heterogeneous juries (i.e. jury response theory or JRT), this study attempts to provide insight into the validity and reliability of the used assessment tool. The results indicate that JRT helps detect unreliable response patterns that indicate an excellence bias, i.e. a tendency not to score in the highest response category. This article concludes with a discussion on how to counter such bias when using rating scales or rubrics for summative assessment.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Excellence bias related to rating scales with summative jury assessment\",\"authors\":\"David Corradi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02602938.2022.2112653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Juries are a high-stake practice in higher education to assess complex competencies. However common, research remains behind in detailing the psychometric qualities of juries, especially when using rubrics or rating scales as an assessment tool. In this study, I analyze a case of a jury assessment (N = 191) of product development where both internal teaching staff and external judges assess and fill in an analytic rating scale. Using polytomous item response theory (IRT) analysis developed for the analysis of heterogeneous juries (i.e. jury response theory or JRT), this study attempts to provide insight into the validity and reliability of the used assessment tool. The results indicate that JRT helps detect unreliable response patterns that indicate an excellence bias, i.e. a tendency not to score in the highest response category. This article concludes with a discussion on how to counter such bias when using rating scales or rubrics for summative assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2112653\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2112653","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

摘要评委会是高等教育中评估复杂能力的高风险实践。然而,研究仍然落后于详细介绍陪审团的心理测量质量,特别是当使用标题或评级量表作为评估工具时。在本研究中,我分析了一个产品开发评审团评估(N = 191)的案例,其中内部教学人员和外部评委都进行评估并填写分析评分量表。本研究采用多元项目反应理论(IRT)分析异质性陪审团(即陪审团反应理论或JRT),试图深入了解所使用的评估工具的效度和信度。结果表明,JRT有助于检测不可靠的反应模式,这些模式表明卓越偏差,即倾向于不在最高反应类别中得分。本文最后讨论了如何在使用评分量表或总结性评估标准时应对这种偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Excellence bias related to rating scales with summative jury assessment
Abstract Juries are a high-stake practice in higher education to assess complex competencies. However common, research remains behind in detailing the psychometric qualities of juries, especially when using rubrics or rating scales as an assessment tool. In this study, I analyze a case of a jury assessment (N = 191) of product development where both internal teaching staff and external judges assess and fill in an analytic rating scale. Using polytomous item response theory (IRT) analysis developed for the analysis of heterogeneous juries (i.e. jury response theory or JRT), this study attempts to provide insight into the validity and reliability of the used assessment tool. The results indicate that JRT helps detect unreliable response patterns that indicate an excellence bias, i.e. a tendency not to score in the highest response category. This article concludes with a discussion on how to counter such bias when using rating scales or rubrics for summative assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
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