Effects of Analytical and Holistic Scoring Patterns on Scorer Reliability in Biology Essay Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature revealed that the patterns/methods of scoring essay tests had been criticized for not being reliable and thisunreliability is more likely to be more in internal examinations than in the external examinations. The purpose of thisstudy is to find out the effects of analytical and holistic scoring patterns on scorer reliability in biology essay tests inEnugu Education Zone of Enugu State. Post-test only control group design was used. All the 212 Biology teachersfrom the thirty one secondary schools in Enugu Education Zone of Enugu State were used. The researcher constructedBiology essay test (BET) with scoring guide on biology essay tests (SGBET) for data collection. The research questionwas answered using Pearson’s Product moment correlation coefficient (r). The hypothesis was tested using t-test. Theresults showed that the use of the holistic scoring pattern was found to be the most reliable followed by analyticalscoring pattern. Recommendations were made based on the findings of the study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".