Premium
Grade Awarding Judgements in Differentiated Examinations
Author(s) -
Good F. J.,
Cresswell M. J.
Publication year - 1988
Publication title -
british educational research journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.171
H-Index - 89
eISSN - 1469-3518
pISSN - 0141-1926
DOI - 10.1080/0141192880140304
Subject(s) - comparability , grading (engineering) , syllabus , consistency (knowledge bases) , variation (astronomy) , mathematics education , psychology , statistical analysis , statistics , internal consistency , achievement test , mathematics , standardized test , computer science , psychometrics , artificial intelligence , engineering , civil engineering , physics , combinatorics , astrophysics
The consistency of grade awarders' standards and the application of these standards to define comparable levels of achievement in differentiated examinations are investigated. An alternative statistical definition of comparability between grades from different versions of differentiated examinations is considered. Little variation in grading standards between teams of awarders was found for the examination as a whole, but some variation was apparent at individual grade boundaries on some components. In general, a higher proportion of candidates reached each grade boundary on easy components than on harder ones. It was thought probable that the standards that awarders apply to complete examinations were not always appropriate when applied to components which test only part of the syllabus. It is suggested that comparable standards of performance on different components should not be defined solely in terms of the awarders' judgements; the need for statistical comparability based on the candidates' responses should be taken into account.