Abstract
The study investigated the effects of three commonly employed rater training procedures on the rating accuracy of novice ESL essay raters. The first training procedure involved going through a set of benchmarked scripts with scores, the second involved assessing benchmarked scripts before viewing the scores. The third was a combination of the former and latter. A pre, post and delayed post-experimental research design was employed. Data were collected before, immediately after and one month after training. Actual IELTS scripts with benchmarked scores determined by subjecting expert IELTS raters’ scores through Multi-Faceted Rasch (MFR) analysis were used for the training and data collection purposes. Sixty-three TESL trainees were selected based on their pre-training rating accuracy to form three equally matched experimental groups. The trainees’ scores for the essays before, immediately after and one month after the assigned training procedure were compared with the official scores for the operational essays. Although the findings indicate that generally, rater training improves raters’ rating accuracy by narrowing the gap between their scores and the official scores, different training procedures seem to have different effects. The first training procedure significantly improved raters’ rating accuracy but showed a decreasing effect with time. The second training procedure showed immediate as well as delayed positive effects on raters’ rating accuracy. The third training did not lead to significant immediate improvement, but rating accuracy improved significantly after some time. This paper discusses the implications of the findings in planning efficient and effective rater training programmes.
Publisher
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Reference61 articles.
1. Alderson, J. C., Clapman, C., & Wall, D. (1995). Language test construction and evaluation. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
2. Attali, Y. (2015). A comparison of newly-trained and experienced raters on a standardized writing assessment. Language Testing, 33(1), 99-115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215582283
3. Azizah, N., Suseno, M., & Hayat, B. (2020). Severity-leniency in writing assessment and its causal factors. In International Conference on Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (IC-HEDS) 2019 (pp. 173-185). Knowledge E. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v4i14.7870
4. Barkaoui, K. (2011). Effects of marking method and rater experience on ESL essay scores and rater performance. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 18(3), 279-293. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.526585
5. Best, J. W. (1977). Research in education (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献