[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-181997-105":59,"doc-detail-181997-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","assessing-individual-and-group-oral-exams-scoring-criteria-and-rater-interaction","Assessing Individual and Group Oral Exams - Scoring Criteria and Rater Interaction","","Criterion-referenced tests of second language speaking performance are used across institutions with different procedures, affecting how grades are assigned. This study examines raters’ practices in individual versus group test modes, focusing on the correspondence between test-takers’ scores. Audio recordings from eight raters capture their scoring decisions, supported by post-test interviews. Student speaking scores for 92 learners are compared across tasks, revealing that raters may also rely on rubric-irrelevant criteria, raising validity concerns.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/assessing-individual-and-group-oral-exams-scoring-criteria-and-rater-interaction/181997/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/assessing-individual-and-group-oral-exams-scoring-criteria-and-rater-interaction/181997.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Aurelia","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-09-02",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"How does the study compare individual and group oral exam scoring?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"It analyzes raters’ decision-making in two test modes and compares the resulting speaking scores from individual versus group discussion tasks.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"What data sources does the study use to examine rater practices?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"The study uses audio recordings of eight raters’ scoring processes, post-test interviews, and speaking scores from 92 students in both modes.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"What issue regarding grading validity does the study raise?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"Even when a grading rubric is used, raters are found to rely on rubric-irrelevant criteria, which may jeopardize the validity of inferences from the scores.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},181997,1788346770,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":34,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":130,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},1099514068365,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/10000253d8d9f28188e?_k=1776742907772140068","| Assessing Individual and Group Oral Exams: Scoring Criteria and Rater Interaction\u003Cbr>Özlem Yalçın-Çolakoğlu1*, Merve Selçuk2\u003Cbr>1School of Foreign Languages, Bahçeşehir University Çırağan road, Osmanpaşa Mektebi Street, 34353 Beşiktaş-İstanbul, Turkey 2School of Foreign Languages, Altınbaş University Mahmutbey Dilmenler Street, Mahmutbey Campus 26, 34218 Bağcılar-İstanbul, Turkey Corresponding Author: Özlem Yalçın-Çolakoğlu, [E-mail: ozlem.yalcin@sfl.bau.edu.tr](E-mail: ozlem.yalcin@sfl.bau.edu.tr) |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| ARTICLE INFO | ABSTRACT\u003Cbr>Criterion referenced tests of second language speaking performance are administered in different institutions using different procedures. The present study reports raters’ practices of second language speaking tests, in particular the correspondence between test-takers’ grades when assessed individually and in groups. Data derived from audio-recordings of raters’(n=8) decision making process (scoring) in two test modes, post-test interviews and two sets of students’(n=92) speaking scores were obtained from individual versus group discussion tasks. Although a grading rubric had been used, it was found that raters also relied on rubric irrelevant criteria when judging performances, which brings up the question whether the validity of the inferences is jeopardized. |\n| Article history\u003Cbr>Received: October 06, 2018\u003Cbr>Accepted: January 17, 2019\u003Cbr>Published: February 28, 2019\u003Cbr>Volume: 10 Issue: 1\u003Cbr>Advance access: January 2019 |  |\n| Conflicts of interest: None\u003Cbr>Funding: None |  |\n| Key words:\u003Cbr>Individual and Group Tasks, Rater,\u003Cbr>Rubric,\u003Cbr>Scoring criteria,\u003Cbr>Speaking |  |\n\n\n| Raters | Number of test takers |  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n|  | Individual\u003Cbr>task | Group task\u003Cbr>(group/ss) |\n| Pair 1 Raters S & Sr | 20 | 7/20 |\n| Pair 2 Raters C & Me | 22 | 7/22 |\n| Pair 3 Raters P & E | 24 | 8/24 |\n| Pair 4 Raters U & M | 26 | 9/26 |\n\n\n| Coding category | No of raters |  | No of incidents |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n|  | Individual task | Group task | Individual task | Group task |\n| Reference to rating criteria | 8 | 8 | 92 | 92 |\n\n\n| Rater | Comments |\n| --- | --- |\n| E | “Arzu was a bit better in coherence”\u003Cbr>“İrem and Arzu were more open to interaction.”“I think the best was Sumeyye.”\u003Cbr>“Özge was better.” |\n| P | “Nilay was more talkative.”\u003Cbr>“Dilber had more mistakes. But she spoke more.”“Alper was better than the others.” |\n| Ma | “The previous group did better”\u003Cbr>“They communicated well, not as good as the previous group though”\u003Cbr>“Zeynep has weaker vocab than Mehmet”\u003Cbr>“Compared to Saadet, Nur Irem was 1 or 2 points lower”\u003Cbr>“Aysenur did a little bit better than Aylin”\u003Cbr>“Aylin was more efficient in terms of fluency” |\n| C | “Irem is a quieter student and she did not interact as well as Saadet Nur”\u003Cbr>“Zulal excels a bit better in vocab and that is why she scored a bit better than fellow friends” |\n| Me | “I will give Aylin considerably lower than the others”\u003Cbr>“Compared to Mehmet she was lacking those skills”“I will give Bahar the lowest for vocabulary.”\u003Cbr>“In grammar Melissa was better than the others”“Rümeysa was the most fluent one”\u003Cbr>“Selen was worse than the others” |\n| U | “Since Edanur was the leader (lead the discussion) she gets the highest score.”\u003Cbr>“I deduct points because she was not as fluent as Gamzenur”\u003Cbr>“Zeynep’s grammar was not ok compared to Mehmet”“In this group Gamzenur shines”\u003Cbr>“This is by far the worst group we had”\u003Cbr>“They are better than the previous group”\u003Cbr>“Mehmet is better than Zeynep”\u003Cbr>“They were all nearly the same so I will give all the same grade” |\n| Se | “Interaction was the best in this group”\u003Cbr>“I think though Hilal was the best” |\n| Ser | “They were better than Tahire so I gave them higher score”\u003Cbr>“Interaction, who was the best?”\u003Cbr>“Tahire was quieter”\u003Cbr>“Yes, she was the best” |\n\n\n|  | Mean | N | Standard\u003Cbr>deviation | Standard\u003Cbr>error mean |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Individual task | 10.27 | ","cbCaicokR2Z55ERU","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicokR2Z55ERU","pdf",334370,"English","# Abstract\n# Key terms\n# Raters and test-takers\n## Individual vs group tasks\n# Coding categories\n# Rater comments\n# Descriptive statistics","[{\"question\":\"How does the study compare individual and group oral exam scoring?\",\"answer\":\"It analyzes raters’ decision-making in two test modes and compares the resulting speaking scores from individual versus group discussion tasks.\"},{\"question\":\"What data sources does the study use to examine rater practices?\",\"answer\":\"The study uses audio recordings of eight raters’ scoring processes, post-test interviews, and speaking scores from 92 students in both modes.\"},{\"question\":\"What issue regarding grading validity does the study raise?\",\"answer\":\"Even when a grading rubric is used, raters are found to rely on rubric-irrelevant criteria, which may jeopardize the validity of inferences from the scores.\"}]","Assessing Individual and Group Oral Exams - Scoring Criteria and Rater Interaction | PDF",18]