Year: 2019
Type: conference-paper
Abstract: Assessment grading in statistics and mathematics has often been approached in an ad-hoc manner, using marking schemes that attach marks to specific steps of a model solution and often do not explicitly reference assessment criteria.Another approach for grading is to use rubrics.Rubrics are recognised to have several advantages for assessment, but research on the reliability of grading with rubrics is equivocal and mostly conducted in less quantitative disciplines.We present a direct comparison of the reliability of marking of a written statistics assignment using a rubric and using the traditional marking scheme approach.We use a Bayesian statistical analysis and find that both methods yield similar levels of inter-rater and intrarater reliability.
Authors: Anthony Morphett, Vasileios Giagos, Sharon Gunn, Jacqueline Reid
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2980436988