Accuracy in the scoring of writing: Studies of reliability and validity using a New Zealand writing assessment system

By Gavin T. L. Brown, Kathryn Glasswell, D. Harland. 2004

161 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity, and educational consequences (2007, methodology): “Coefficient values exceeding .80 are often considered as acceptable (Brown et al., 2004; Marzano, 2002), but as most of the values reported were between .50 and .80, the majority of estimates do not reach this criterion.”
The Use of Scoring Rubrics for Formative Assessment Purposes Revisited: A Review. (2013, methodology): “Similarly, the students in a study by Brown, Glasswell, and Harland (2004) showed quite large improvements (effect size = 1.6).”
From feedback to revisions: Effects of feedback features and perceptions (2020, background): “In other words, the accurate and consistent scoring of essays is difficult (Brown et al., 2004), and the mean peer score has similar reliability and validity to single expert ratings.”
To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy (2014, background): “Self-assessment accuracy is important as it affects the validity of the assessment itself and the con ﬁ dence that teachers and students have in this procedure (Brown, Glasswell, & Harland, 2004).”