Judges’ views on pairwise Comparative Judgement and Rank Ordering as alternatives to analytical essay marking


Change log
Authors
Walland, Emma 
Abstract

In this article, I report on examiners' views and experiences of using Pairwise Comparative Judgement (PCJ) and Rank Ordering (RO) as alternatives to traditional analytical marking for GCSE English Language essays. Fifteen GCSE English Language examiners took part in the study. After each had judged 100 pairs of essays using PCJ and eight packs of ten essays using RO, I collected data on their experiences and views of the methods through interviews and questionnaires. I analysed the data using thematic content analysis.

The findings highlight that, if the methods were to be used as alternatives to marking, examiners and other stakeholders would need reassurance that the methods are fair, valid and reliable. Examiners would also need more training and support to help them to judge holistically. The lack of detail about how judgements are made using these methods is a concern worth following up and addressing before implementation.

Description
Keywords
Comparative Judgement, Examiner Judgement
Journal Title
Research Matters
Conference Name
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Research Division, Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Publisher DOI
Publisher URL
Relationships