Towards an understanding of teacher judgement in the context of social moderation

Social moderation involves teachers gathering together to discuss their judgements of the quality of student work and to reach agreement regarding the standard awarded. This qualitative study conducted over a three-year period investigated the social practice of moderation and the influence on teachers’ judgements of students’ work. An initial survey of teachers’ understandings of moderation and standards, pre- and post-interviews of teachers who participated in the moderation meetings, observations of these meetings with a particular focus on one teacher (focus teachers) comprised the data collection methods. Data analysis involved organising, matching, coding, identifying patterns and themes using a constant comparative method. Socio-cultural theories of learning and assessment underpinned the approach to data analysis and proved helpful in explaining the diverse influences on teachers’ judgements beyond the task criteria, and the progressive development of shared understandings through engaging in professional discussions of students’ work. The study revealed that the process is not clear and linear and is influenced by factors such as the representation of the standards and the knowledge base of the teachers.

[1]  B. Rogoff Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship , 1995 .

[2]  Meaning, normativity and the life of the mind , 1997 .

[3]  E. Bredo Reconstructing educational psychology: Situated cognition and Deweyian pragmatism , 1994 .

[4]  J. Greatorex,et al.  A quantitative analysis of cognitive strategy usage in the marking of two GCSE examinations , 2008 .

[5]  Wynne Harlen Concepts of Quality in Student Assessment. , 1994 .

[6]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading , 2009 .

[7]  P. Cobb Where Is the Mind? Constructivist and Sociocultural Perspectives on Mathematical Development , 1994 .

[8]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Grade integrity and the representation of academic achievement , 2009 .

[9]  Graham S. Maxwell Quality management of school-based assessments: Moderation of teacher judgments , 2006 .

[10]  G. Maxwell Moderation of Assessments in Vocational Education and Training , 2001 .

[11]  Benny Yung Examiner, Policeman or Students' Companion: Teachers' perceptions of their role in an assessment reform , 2001 .

[12]  Jackie Greatorex,et al.  What makes marking reliable? Experiments with UK examinations , 2004 .

[13]  Gordon Stobart,et al.  Testing Times: The Uses and Abuses of Assessment , 2008 .

[14]  M. Goos,et al.  Queensland curriculum, assessment and reporting (QCAR) framework evaluation project-phase 1 (2006-2008) , 2008 .

[15]  Valentina Klenowski,et al.  Assessment for learning in the accountability era: queensland, australia , 2011 .

[16]  Belita Gordon,et al.  Score Resolution and the Interrater Reliability of Holistic Scores in Rating Essays , 2001 .

[17]  Jannette Elwood,et al.  Gender Issues in Testing and Assessment , 2006 .

[18]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[19]  Mark Wilson Assessment, Accountability and the Classroom: A Community of Judgment , 2004, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[20]  Bryce Walker,et al.  The flat world and education: how America’s commitment to equity will determine our future , 2012 .

[21]  R. Rieber,et al.  The Instrumental Method in Psychology , 1997 .

[22]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[23]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Transforming Holistic Assessment and Grading into a Vehicle for Complex Learning , 2009 .