Checkbox grading of large-scale mathematics exams with multiple assessors: Field study on assessors’ inter-rater reliability, time investment and usage experience

Assessing exams with multiple assessors is challenging regarding inter-rater reliability and feedback. This paper presents ‘checkbox grading,’ a digital method where exam designers have predefined checkboxes with both feedback and associated partial grades. Assessors then tick the checkboxes relevant to a student solution. Dependencies between checkboxes ensure consistency among assessors in following the grading scheme. Moreover, the approach supports ‘blind grading’ by hiding the grades associated with the checkboxes, thus focusing assessors on the criteria rather than the scores. The approach was studied during a large-scale mathematics state exam. Results show that assessors perceived checkbox grading as very useful. However, compared to traditional grading—where assessors follow a correction scheme and communicate the resulting grade—more time is spent on checkbox grading, while both approaches are equally reliable. Blind grading improved inter-rater reliability for some tasks. Overall, checkbox grading might lead to a smoother process where feedback, not solely grades, is communicated to students. • Checkbox grading uses feedback-linked checkboxes; assessors tick those that apply. • Checkbox dependencies make grading dynamic, forming a flowchart-like structure. • Scores can be shown (visible) or hidden (blind) from assessors during grading. • Blind checkbox grading improves reliability when strict interpretation is needed. • Assessors prefer visible grading for clarity and validation of their judgments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Studies In Educational Evaluation
Published
2025-01-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101443
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.11

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Checkbox grading of large-scale mathematics exams with multiple assessors: Field study on assessors’ inter-rater reliability, time investment and usage experience

Ellen Vandervieren, Filip Moons, Jozef Colpaert
1 citations
Studies In Educational Evaluation
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
2.11
article

Checkbox grading of large-scale mathematics exams with multiple assessors: Field study on assessors’ inter-rater reliability, time investment and usage experience

Ellen Vandervieren, Filip Moons, Jozef Colpaert
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Assessing exams with multiple assessors is challenging regarding inter-rater reliability and feedback. This paper presents ‘checkbox grading,’ a digital method where exam designers have predefined checkboxes with both feedback and associated partial grades. Assessors then tick the checkboxes relevant to a student solution. Dependencies between checkboxes ensure consistency among assessors in following the grading scheme. Moreover, the approach supports ‘blind grading’ by hiding the grades associated with the checkboxes, thus focusing assessors on the criteria rather than the scores. The approach was studied during a large-scale mathematics state exam. Results show that assessors perceived checkbox grading as very useful. However, compared to traditional grading—where assessors follow a correction scheme and communicate the resulting grade—more time is spent on checkbox grading, while both approaches are equally reliable. Blind grading improved inter-rater reliability for some tasks. Overall, checkbox grading might lead to a smoother process where feedback, not solely grades, is communicated to students. • Checkbox grading uses feedback-linked checkboxes; assessors tick those that apply. • Checkbox dependencies make grading dynamic, forming a flowchart-like structure. • Scores can be shown (visible) or hidden (blind) from assessors during grading. • Blind checkbox grading improves reliability when strict interpretation is needed. • Assessors prefer visible grading for clarity and validation of their judgments.

Studies In Educational EvaluationVol. 85
University of Antwerp (BE), Utrecht University (NL)
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
2.11
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.