|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
00000nam a22000002u 4500 |
| 001 |
in00004180044 |
| 003 |
ERIC |
| 005 |
20220616055050.0 |
| 007 |
he u||024|||| |
| 008 |
030401s2003 xx ||| bt ||| | eng d |
| 035 |
|
|
|a ED481661 Microfiche
|
| 040 |
|
|
|a ericd
|c ericd
|d MvI
|d UtOrBLW
|
| 049 |
0 |
0 |
|a EEM#
|
| 099 |
|
|
|a ED481661 Microfiche
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Popp, Sharon E. Osborn.
|
| 245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Operationalizing the Rubric :
|b The Effect of Benchmark Selection on the Assessed Quality of Writing /
|c Sharon E. Osborn Popp, Joseph M. Ryan and Marilyn S. Thompson.
|
| 260 |
|
|
|a [Place of publication not identified] :
|b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
|c 2003.
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a 36 pages
|
| 336 |
|
|
|a text
|b txt
|2 rdacontent
|
| 337 |
|
|
|a microform
|b h
|2 rdamedia
|
| 338 |
|
|
|a microfiche
|b he
|2 rdacarrier
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a ERIC Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, April 21-25, 2003).
|5 ericd
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a The purposes of this study were to investigate the role of benchmark writing samples in direct assessment of writing and to examine the consequences of differential benchmark selection with a common writing rubric. The influences of discourse and grade level were also examined within the context of differential benchmark selection. Raters scored sets of writing samples against a common writing rubric. Ratings were completed for 317 students in grade 3, 180 I grade 5, and 172 in grade 8. Twelve raters from a commercial testing company scores the across-grades writing samples and six to seven raters cored each set of within-grade writing samples. Benchmarks used in scoring were chosen from either within a single grade or from across several grades, depending on the set of writing samples to be scored. Raw ratings were analyzed using multifacet Rasch models and were compared to hypothetical performance standards. Results show that the assessed quality of writing depends on the benchmarks chosen to define the rubric, which are described in the paper as the operational definition of the scoring rubric. (Contains 13 tables, 7 figures, and 17 references.) (Author/SLD)
|
| 533 |
|
|
|a Microfiche.
|b [Washington D.C.]:
|c ERIC Clearinghouse
|e microfiches : positive.
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a Microform.
|
| 650 |
1 |
7 |
|a Benchmarking.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
0 |
7 |
|a Elementary Education.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
1 |
7 |
|a Elementary School Students.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
0 |
7 |
|a Interrater Reliability.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
1 |
7 |
|a Scoring Rubrics.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
0 |
7 |
|a Selection.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
0 |
7 |
|a Writing Evaluation.
|2 ericd
|
| 650 |
0 |
7 |
|a Writing Tests.
|2 ericd
|
| 653 |
1 |
|
|a Writing Samples
|
| 655 |
|
7 |
|a Reports, Research.
|2 ericd
|
| 655 |
|
7 |
|a Speeches/Meeting Papers.
|2 ericd
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Ryan, Joseph M.,
|e author.
|0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n88005741
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Thompson, Marilyn S.,
|e author.
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Behrens, John T.,
|e author.
|
| 907 |
|
|
|y .b65761923
|b 211123
|c 090103
|
| 998 |
|
|
|a mc
|b 090103
|c m
|d a
|e -
|f eng
|g xx
|h 0
|i 1
|
| 982 |
|
|
|a no_backstage
|
| 999 |
f |
f |
|i 182dd91d-1d62-53a2-8a81-87484178351b
|s 28f16371-76c7-58e6-ace0-693d1d1f77eb
|t 0
|
| 952 |
f |
f |
|p Non-Circulating
|a Michigan State University-Library of Michigan
|b Michigan State University
|c MSU Microforms
|d MSU Microforms, 2 West
|t 0
|e ED481661 Microfiche
|h Other scheme
|i Microform (Microfilm/Microfiche)
|n 1
|
