The Relation Between Score Resolution Methods and Interrater Reliability: An Empirical Study of an Analytic Scoring Rubric
By Robert Johnson, Jim Penny, Belita Gordon. 2000
99 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Mechanics of Materials
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7796f76a5141404e8fba15aa87cd54bacfa71ec1
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Mechanics of Materials
Citations in the corpus
- Reliability and validity of rubrics for assessment through writing (2010, unknown): “It must, therefore, be considered that the reported inter-rater reliability might be artificially high simply because the assigned relative rankings are the same, and not because the measurement is accurate (Johnson, Penny, & Gordon, 2000).”
- Beyond New and Appropriate: Who Decides What Is Creative? (2012, background): “Before the ratings they first underwent a brief training activity that resembles the kinds of calibration training given to holistic scorers in other (non-creativity) assessments (Johnson, Penny, & Gordon, 2000 ).”
- The Relationship between Undergraduate Research Participation and Subsequent Research Performance of Early Career STEM Graduate Students (2015, unknown): “All discrepancies were resolved by discussion until consensus was reached (Johnson et al., 2000; Johnson et al., 2005).”
- Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: an empirical study of student peer‐group rating (2003, methodology): “The estimates for the generalizability coefficients of table 1 are based on two raters in keeping with convention (see Johnson et al. 2000) and to aid in comparing these coefficients with the more traditional Spearman’s correlation coefficient (rS is limited to inter-rater reliability based on…”
- Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice (2017, background): “For a review of possible approaches to inter-marker reliability, see Johnson, Penny, and Gordon (2000).”