Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language Testing
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Elder, C.
Right arrow Articles by von Randow, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluating rater responses to an online training program for L2 writing assessment

Catherine Elder

University of Melbourne, caelder{at}unimelb.edu.au

Gary Barkhuizen

University of Auckland

Ute Knoch

University of Auckland

Janet von Randow

University of Auckland

The use of online rater self-training is growing in popularity and has obvious practical benefits, facilitating access to training materials and rating samples and allowing raters to reorient themselves to the rating scale and self monitor their behaviour at their own convenience. However there has thus far been little research into rater attitudes to training via this modality and its effectiveness in enhancing levels of inter- and intra-rater agreement.

The current study explores these issues in relation to an analytically-scored academic writing task designed to diagnose undergraduates’ English learning needs. 8 ESL raters scored a number of pre-rated benchmark writing samples online and received immediate feedback in the form of a discrepancy score indicating the gap between their own rating of the various categories of the rating scale and the official ratings assigned to the benchmark writing samples.

A batch of writing samples was rated twice (before and after participating in the online training) by each rater and Multifaceted Rasch analyses were used to compare levels of rater agreement and rater bias (on each analytic rating category). Raters’ views regarding the effectiveness of the training were also canvassed.

While findings revealed limited overall gains in reliability, there was considerable individual variation in receptiveness to the training input. The paper concludes with suggestions for refining the online training program and for further research into factors influencing rater responsiveness.

Language Testing, Vol. 24, No. 1, 37-64 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0265532207071511


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Language TestingHome page
U. Knoch
Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales
Language Testing, April 1, 2009; 26(2): 275 - 304.
[Abstract] [PDF]