Abstract
Comparative judgment (CJ) has been recently introduced in the educational field as a means of assessing competences. In this judgement process, assessors are presented with two pieces of student work and are asked to choose which one is better in relation to the competencies being assessed. However, since student work is heterogeneous and highly information loaded, it raises the question as to whether this type of assessment is too complex for assessors to use. Previous research on the topic has operationalized experienced complexity by employing self-report measures, which have been criticized for common problems associated with their use. In our study, we used eye tracking to study 23 high school teachers when they made 10 comparative judgments, and their pupil diameter was used as an indicator of the experienced complexity. This study builds on previous research that integrated Campbell’s theory on task complexity (1988) into CJ. Based on this framework, three hypotheses regarding the role of decision accuracy were formulated and empirically tested. Hypothesis one assumes that the distance between two pieces of student work on the rank-order (rank-order distance) is negatively related to experienced complexity, irrespective of decision accuracy. Hypothesis two assumes that decision accuracy moderates the relationship between rank-order distance and experienced complexity. Hypothesis three builds on hypothesis two by adding a negative relationship between experience and experienced complexity. In all three hypotheses, the average experienced complexity is assumed to vary between assessors, as is the strength of the expected relationships. An information-theoretic approach was used to test the holding of all three hypotheses. All hypotheses were translated into statistical models, and their relative and absolute fit were assessed. Results provided strong evidence for hypothesis three: both the moderating role of decision accuracy on the relationship between rank-order distance and experienced complexity, and the relationship between experience and experienced complexity, were confirmed.
Highlights
Comparative judgment (CJ) has been introduced in the educational field as a means of assessing competences in various subjects such as writing (Pollitt, 2012a; van Daal, et al, 2019)
The results provided by van Daal et al (2017) indicate that the same rise in rank-order distance is associated with a different decrease in experienced complexity across assessors
Model 3 represents hypothesis 3 and incorporates the role of rank-order distance, decision accuracy, and assessors’ experience with experienced complexity. It expects mean experienced complexity and the strength of the relationship between rank-order distance and experienced complexity to differ between assessors
Summary
Comparative judgment (CJ) has been introduced in the educational field as a means of assessing competences in various subjects such as writing (Pollitt, 2012a; van Daal, et al, 2019) In this discernment process, assessors are presented with two texts and are asked to determine which one is of higher quality. Research has demonstrated the reliability and validity of this method (e.g., Pollitt, 2012a; Pollit, 2012b; Jones and Inglis, 2015; Lesterhuis, 2018), it is questionable whether assessors can discriminate, decide which one is better, between all pairs of texts Do these texts contain information related to various aspects of textual quality (Sadler, 1989), such information can be heterogeneous in nature (e.g., a well-structured text that is poor in argumentation). We raise the question as to whether this type of CJ is too complex for assessors to use
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have