Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article examines the reliability of markers and questions the practice of double marking versus single marking of student essays. Three investigations were carried out and analysed, one with the use of descriptive statistics and two with inferential statistics. All three investigations involved two staff members assessing student essays independently and using the same general marking criteria. In addition, the first investigation used specific marking criteria drawn up by the two staff prior to marking. The results of the three investigations were that investigation one had a very high correlation and investigations two and three a high correlation. All three results showed that markers had a high degree of reliability. In addition, the higher correlations found in investigation one strongly supported the use of specific marking criteria drawn up prior to marking as a recommended assessment procedure to follow.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bland

Altman

(1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 8 Feb, 307–10.

Boud

(1995) Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London; Kogan Page.

Brown

Knight

(1994) Assessing learners in higher education. London: Kogan Page.

Brown

Rust

Gibbs

(1994) Strategies for diversifying assessment in higher education. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University.

Child

(1986) Psychology and the teacher. London: Holt.

Currier

(1984) Elements of research in physical therapy. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.

Discipline of Occupational Therapy (1994) Guide to assessment procedures. York: University College of Ripon and York St John.

Gogia

Braatz

Rose

Norton

(1987) Reliability and validity of goniometric measurements at the knee. Physical Therapy, 67(2), 192–95.

Guildford

(1956) Fundamental statisticals in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

10.

Hicks

(1988) Practical research methods for physiotherapists. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.

11.

Leedy

(1993) Practical research: Planning and design. New York: Macmillan.

12.

Newstead

Dennis

(1994) Examiners examined. The Psychologist, May, 216–19.

13.

Newstead

(1996) The psychology of student assessment. The Psychologist, Dec, 543–47.

14.

Roscoe

(1975) Fundamental research statistics for the behavioural sciences. New York: Holt.

15.

Rose

(1991) The statistical analysis of the intra-observer repeatability of four clinical measurement techniques. Physiotherapy, 77(2), 89–91.

16.

Rothstein

(1985) Measurement in physical therapy. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.

17.

Rouse

(1996) Single marking: The way forward? British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59(9), 415–17.

18.

Shrout

Fleiss

(1979) Lntraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–28.

19.

Williams

Sanford

Stratford

Newman

(1991) Essays: A reliability study. Physical Therapy, 71(9), 679–86.

20.

Wood

(1987) Measurement and assessment in education and psychology. London: Falmer Press.

21.

Yang

(1987) Reliability of grading essay papers in a baccalaureate nursing programme. Nurse Education Today, 7, 120–25.

The Reliability of Markers

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References