Decision Making While Rating ESL/EFL Writing Tasks: A Descriptive Framework.

By Alister H Cumming, Robert N. Kantor, Donald E. Powers. 2002

241 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f111361118436a90af6dabacb4ea1e3b66735e4

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL (2005, unknown): “…the prototype writing tasks, for example, based on the verbal reports of experienced raters performing holistic evaluations of examinees’ essays in Cumming, Kantor, and Powers (2001, 2002) or of experienced teachers judging the writing of their students on prototype tasks as in Cumming, Grant,…”
Diagnostic Writing Assessment: The Development and Validation of a Rating Scale (2009, methodology): “289 291 292 292 293 294 295 295 298 299 300 301 311 316 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Summary of the effects of task characteristics on complexity, accuracy, and fluency 19 Table 2: Types of rating scales for the assessment of writing (based on Weigle, 2002) 30 Table 3: Jacob’s scale (ESL composition prof”
Generalizability of writing scores: an application of structural equation modeling (2005, background): “See also Cumming et al. (2002) for a qualitative study of decision-making by raters while rating compositions.”
Variability in ESL Essay Rating Processes: The Role of the Rating Scale and Rater Experience (2010, unknown): “Most qualitative studies have investigated the decision-making behaviors and aspects of writing that raters attend to when rating essays with no specific rating guidelines (eg, Cumming, Kantor, & Powers, 2002 ; Delaruelle, 1997 ), or when using holistic (eg, Milanovic, Saville, & Shuhong, 1996 ; ”
AN EXAMINATION OF RATER ORIENTATIONS AND TEST-TAKER PERFORMANCE ON ENGLISH-FOR-ACADEMIC-PURPOSES SPEAKING TASKS (2005, background): “This finding concurs with that of Pollitt and Murray (1996), whose raters focused less on discourse skills at the lower levels, and with that of Cumming et al. (2002) in the assessment of writing.”
Rater types in writing performance assessments: A classification approach to rater variability (2008, methodology): “Cumming et al. (2001; 2002) also looked at the criteria that emerged from think-aloud data and identified three general categories: a self-monitoring focus (e.g., reading or rereading the essay, comparing with other essays), a rhetorical and ideational focus (e.g., assessing topic development, task…”