Lack of inter-rater agreement in the assessment of oral tests is wellknown. In this paper, multi-faceted Rasch analysis was used to determine whether any bias was evident in the way a group of raters (N=13) rated two different versions of an oral interaction test, undertaken by the same candidates (N=83) under the two conditions – direct and semi-direct. Rasch measurement allows analysis of the interaction between ‘facets’; in this case, raters, items and candidates are all facets. In this study, the interaction between rater and item was investigated in order to determine whether particular tasks in the test were scored in a consistently biased way by particular raters. The results of the analysis indicated that certain raters consistently assessed the tape-version of the test more harshly whilst others consistently rated the live version more harshly. This type of approach also allowed a finer analysis at the level of individual items with respect to harshness and consistency across ratings. The implications for rater training and feedback are discussed.
(1993) The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation-specific language performance test. Paper presented at the annual Language Testing Research Colloquium, Cambridge, U.K., August 2-5
(1993) Are rater judgements of teacher effectiveness wholly language based. Paper presented at the annual Language Testing Research Colloquium, Cambridge, U.K., August 2-5
Fayer, J.M. and E. Krasinski
(1987) Native and nonnative judgements of intelligibility and irritation. Language Learning 37,3:313–326
Linacre, J A M.
(1992a) FACETS computer program for many faceted Rasch measurement (version 2.62). Chicago IL: Mesa Press
(1992b) A User’s Guide to Facets. Chicago IL: Mesa Press
(1990) Item Response Theory and the validation of an ESP test for health professionals, Language Testing 71:52–75
in preparation) Second Language Performance Assessment. Unpublished manuscript.
Shohamy, E., C.M. Gordon and R. Kraemer
(1992) The effect of rater’ background and training on the reliability of direct writing test. The Modern Language Journal 76,1:27–33
Stahl, J. and Lunz, M.
(1992) Judge Performance Reports. Paper presented at AERA, San Francisco, April
(1993) Exploring bias analysis as a tool for improving rater consistency in assessing oral interaction. Language Testing, 10,3:305–335
Cited by 17 other publications
Ang-Aw, Hui Teng & Christine Chuen Meng Goh
2011. Understanding Discrepancies in Rater Judgement on National-Level Oral Examination Tasks. RELC Journal 42:1 ► pp. 31 ff.
Brown, James Dean & Russell Changseob Ahn
2011. Variables that affect the dependability of L2 pragmatics tests. Journal of Pragmatics 43:1 ► pp. 198 ff.
Congdon, Peter J. & Joy MeQueen
2000. The Stability of Rater Severity in Large‐Scale Assessment Programs. Journal of Educational Measurement 37:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
Finn, Bridgid, Burcu Arslan & Matthew Walsh
2020. Applying Cognitive Theory to the Human Essay Rating Process. Applied Measurement in Education 33:3 ► pp. 223 ff.
Finn, Bridgid, Cathy Wendler, Kathryn L. Ricker‐Pedley & Burcu Arslan
2018. Does the Time Between Scoring Sessions Impact Scoring Accuracy? An Evaluation of Constructed‐Response Essay Responses on the GRE® General Test. ETS Research Report Series 2018:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Goh, Christine C. M. & Hui Teng Ang-Aw
2018. Teacher-Examiners’ Explicit and Enacted Beliefs About Proficiency Indicators in National Oral Assessments. In Teacher Involvement in High-Stakes Language Testing, ► pp. 197 ff.
2002. A FACETS analysis of rater bias in measuring Japanese second language writing performance. Language Testing 19:1 ► pp. 3 ff.
2008. Rater bias patterns in an EFL writing assessment. Language Testing 25:4 ► pp. 465 ff.
Tajeddin, Zia & Minoo Alemi
2014. Criteria and Bias in Native English Teachers’ Assessment of L2 Pragmatic Appropriacy: Content and FACETS Analyses. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 23:3 ► pp. 425 ff.
Walsh, Matthew M., Burcu Arslan & Bridgid Finn
2021. Computational cognitive modeling of human calibration and validity response scoring for the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE).. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 10:1 ► pp. 143 ff.
Wesolowski, Brian C., Stefanie A. Wind & George Engelhard
2015. Rater fairness in music performance assessment: Evaluating model-data fit and differential rater functioning. Musicae Scientiae 19:2 ► pp. 147 ff.
2012. Rating Oral Language. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,
2013. The Influence of Second Language Experience and Accent Familiarity on Oral Proficiency Rating: A Qualitative Investigation. TESOL Quarterly 47:4 ► pp. 762 ff.
Winke, Paula, Susan Gass & Carol Myford
2011. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RATERS' PRIOR LANGUAGE STUDY AND THE EVALUATION OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE SPEECH SAMPLES. ETS Research Report Series 2011:2 ► pp. i ff.
Winke, Paula, Susan Gass & Carol Myford
2013. Raters’ L2 background as a potential source of bias in rating oral performance. Language Testing 30:2 ► pp. 231 ff.
ŞEVGİN, Hikmet & Mehmet ŞATA
2023. The Role of Time on Performance Assessment (Self, Peer and Teacher) in Higher Education: Rater Drift. Participatory Educational Research 10:5 ► pp. 98 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.