[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-621058-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-621058-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","centre-for-education-research-and-policy-examining-experience-marking-media-and-standardisation","Centre for Education Research and Policy - Examining Experience: Marking Media and Standardisation","","Centre for Education Research and Policy Section 1 and Section 2 analyze examiners’ experiences and attitudes toward examining, covering marking format (online vs paper), standardisation methods, seniority-related aspects, and perceived influences such as pressure, pay, and standardisation. Intention to continue examining is measured using Likert-scale items and a derived scale with three indicators, supplemented by open-ended questions. Section 3 assesses personality traits but is not pursued further. Statistical tests compare intentions across marking media and delivery modes, while conclusions emphasize small but significant differences, methodological caveats, and potential confounds.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/centre-for-education-research-and-policy-examining-experience-marking-media-and-standardisation/621058/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/centre-for-education-research-and-policy-examining-experience-marking-media-and-standardisation/621058.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Sarah ","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-10-20",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How is “intention to continue examining” measured?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Participants rate agreement on a four-point Likert scale, and the mean of responses to three specific items is used to calculate an “intention to continue examining” scale.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What effect do marking media have on intentions to continue examining?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"A Mann-Whitney U test shows a significant difference between paper-only and both-media examiners, but the effect size is very small (r = -0.07), with paper-only having lower median intentions.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Do different standardisation delivery modes change intentions to continue examining?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Kruskal-Wallis tests find no significant differences across face-to-face only, partly online, and fully online standardisation groups. The paper notes robustness concerns because standardisation was assessed only in the most recent series.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},621058,1792612314,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":97,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},962085320529,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Centre for Education Research and Policy  \nSection 1 c onsisted of 14 ques tions relating to examining experience: whether they marked online or on paper, whether they were standardised online, their level of seniority and so on (see Appendix 1) . Section 2 (see Tremain, 2011) consisted of 35 statements - 15 positive, 17 negative - about examining, including items on pressure, pay, and standardisation, among others. Participants rated their level of agreement with each statement using a four-point Likert scale (strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree, and not applicable) . The mean of participants’ responses to three items was used to calculate an “intention to continue examining” scale: I expect to examine for the AQA for the foreseeable future; I intend to examine for the AQA for the foreseeable future; I want to continue examining for the AQA for the foreseeable future. There were also three open-ended questions. Section 3 consisted of 25 items aimed at assessing respondents’ personality traits. However, this approach to assessing personality was unsuccessful and this section will not be discussed further.  \nAs it was originally intended to look at the relation between examiner performance and satisfaction, 16 performance groups were created by cross-tabulating mean mark adjustmentsand mean grade categories. From the 8,273 examiners for whom these data could be collected, a sample of 3,001 examiners was drawn randomly, while maintaining the proportion of examiners in each group. However, the predominance of examiners in group 1 m eant that performance could not usefully be included in statistical analysis. This method also resulted in examiners using CMI+ being under-represented, as they do not receive mark adjustments. For more details of the sample demographics, please refer to Tremain (2011) .  \nResults  \nFor experiences of marking using different media, examiners were divided into three groups: those who had only ever marked online (n = 17), those who had only marked on paper (n = 660), and those who had used both media (n = 413) . As the group of those who had marked online only was so small, particularly in comparison to the other groups, it was excluded from further analysis.  \nA Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to investigate whether there was a significant difference in intentions to continue examining between examiners who had marked on paper only compared to those who had marked using both media. The results indicated that there was a significant difference (U = 125940.00 , p = .025 , r = -0.07), with those marking on paper having lower intentions to continue examining (a median score of 3.67) compared to those who had marked using both media (a median score of 4 .00) . However, with an r of .07, this represents avery small effect.  \nKruskal-Wallis tests were also used to investigate the relationship between experiences of different modes of delivering standardisation and intentions to continue examining. Examiners were divided into three groups: those who received only face-to-face standardising (n = 230) in the last series for which they performed marking, those who had been standardised online for some of the components they marked, but not for others (n = 283), and those who were standardised entirely online (n = 586) . No significant difference was found between the three groups (H (2) = 4.39 , p = .11) .  \nConclusions and caveats  \nThis paper sought to explore the impact of different experiences of marking and standardisingon examiners’ intentions to continue examining. The results indicate that there was a very small, but significant , difference in intentions to continue examining between examiners who marked on paper only compared to those who used both media, with examiners who marked using both media having higher intentions to continue than their paper only counterparts. There was no  \nsignificant difference in intentions to continue between examiners with experiences of standardising with","cbCaii7BlTrXrxx7","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaii7BlTrXrxx7","pdf",1085701,"English","# Introduction\n## Examining experience and questionnaire structure\n## Sampling and performance-group creation\n# Results\n## Marking media: online, paper, and both\n## Standardisation delivery modes\n# Conclusions and caveats","[{\"question\":\"How is “intention to continue examining” measured?\",\"answer\":\"Participants rate agreement on a four-point Likert scale, and the mean of responses to three specific items is used to calculate an “intention to continue examining” scale.\"},{\"question\":\"What effect do marking media have on intentions to continue examining?\",\"answer\":\"A Mann-Whitney U test shows a significant difference between paper-only and both-media examiners, but the effect size is very small (r = -0.07), with paper-only having lower median intentions.\"},{\"question\":\"Do different standardisation delivery modes change intentions to continue examining?\",\"answer\":\"Kruskal-Wallis tests find no significant differences across face-to-face only, partly online, and fully online standardisation groups. The paper notes robustness concerns because standardisation was assessed only in the most recent series.\"}]","Centre for Education Research and Policy - Examining Experience: Marking Media and Standardisation | PDF",1792464910,13]