Automated scoring systems are typically evaluated by comparing the performance of a single automated rater item-by-item to human raters. This presents a challenge when the performance of multiple raters needs to be compared across multiple items. Rankings could depend on specifics of the ranking procedure; observed differences could be due to…

The literature on Automated Essay Scoring (AES) systems has provided useful validation frameworks for any assessment that includes AES scoring. Furthermore, evidence for the scoring fidelity of AES systems is accumulating. Yet questions remain when appraising the scoring performance of AES systems. These questions include: (a) which essays are…

In the current study, two pools of 250 essays, all written as a response to the same prompt, were rated by two groups of raters (14 or 15 raters per group), thereby providing an approximation to the essay's true score. An automated essay scoring (AES) system was trained on the datasets and then scored the essays using a cross-validation scheme. By…

As an alternative to rubric scoring, comparative judgment generates essay scores by aggregating decisions about the relative quality of the essays. Comparative judgment eliminates certain scorer biases and potentially reduces training requirements, thereby allowing a large number of judges, including teachers, to participate in essay evaluation.…

Automated essay scoring is a developing technology that can provide efficient scoring of large numbers of written responses. Its use in higher education admissions testing provides an opportunity to collect validity and fairness evidence to support current uses and inform its emergence in other areas such as K-12 large-scale assessment. In this…