Lunz M E, Stahl J A
American Society of Clinical Pathologists, Chicago, Illinois 60612.
J Allied Health. 1990 Spring;19(2):173-9.
This study explored the effect of scoring criteria on the decision consistency of judges. Intra- and interjudge consistencies were compared when two different scoring criteria were used by the same judges. Analytic criteria included detailed assessments of a student's performance, while holistic criteria included only a subjective global assessment. Data from 18 judges and 9 histotechnology practical examinations were analyzed. Lack of intrajudge decision consistency was observed when the same practical examinations were assessed using analytic and holistic criteria. Interjudge decision consistency also varied when the different scoring criteria were used. More practical examinations were judged as passing when analytic scoring criteria were used. This particular analysis did not support a definitive conclusion concerning the value of holistic and analytic criteria.
本研究探讨了评分标准对评委决策一致性的影响。当同一批评委使用两种不同的评分标准时，对评委内部和评委间的一致性进行了比较。分析性标准包括对学生表现的详细评估，而整体性标准仅包括主观的整体评估。对来自18名评委和9次组织技术实践考试的数据进行了分析。当使用分析性和整体性标准对相同的实践考试进行评估时，观察到评委内部决策缺乏一致性。当使用不同的评分标准时，评委间的决策一致性也有所不同。使用分析性评分标准时，更多的实践考试被判定为及格。这项具体分析并不支持关于整体性和分析性标准价值的明确结论。
