20–22 Nov 2026
The WINC Aichi
Asia/Tokyo timezone

Unmasking the Hidden World of the EAP Rater's Cognition

20 Nov 2026, 17:40
30m
The WINC Aichi

The WINC Aichi

Research-oriented Presentation (30-minutes) TEVAL: Testing and Evaluation Room 1107

Speaker

Kristina Isabelle Valerio (University of Santo Tomas - Manila)

Abstract section 5: References

Eckes, T. (2008). Rater types in writing assessments: A classification approach to rater variability. Language Testing 25 (2) 155-185.

Fives, H., Barnes, N., Buehl, M., Mascardi, J., & Ziegler, N. (2017). Teachers’ epistemic cognition on classroom assessment. Educational Psychologist 1532-6985. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1323218

Mayring, P. (2022). Qualitative content analysis: A step-by-step guide. Los Angeles, USA; Sage Publishing House.

Saldana, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

Vanover, C., Mihas, P., & Saldana, J. (2022). Analyzing and interpreting qualitative research: After the interview. Los Angeles, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results

Using (Eckes, 2008) operational rater variability hypothesis on the deductive attribute coding of the global-local assessment priorities showed that syntax and correctness are the most common clusters. Moreover, the deductive analysis on the think-aloud transcripts reflected the influences of the rater’s language and education background, teaching and rating experience, and active involvement in professional development activities on the rater’s assessment decisions and practice. Additionally, the inductive coding of the WCFs reflected classifications of varying levels of harshness (indirect, mitigated, or direct). These results were used to design a professional development workshop using Fives et al.'s (2017) 3R-EC framework.

Abstract section 1: Relevance

Emphasizing the teacher’s central figure in the English for Academic Purposes writing classroom, this study explored non-native language teacher cognition and reflection as a rater in using a performance-based assessment rubric for a collaborative writing project.

Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions

Because no study has been conducted on the cognition, practices, experiences, and reflections of the Filipino teacher of the English for Academic Purposes subject in using a collaborative performance-based writing assessment, the study answered the research question: Given a postpositivist paradigm, how is writing assessment perceived and performed by EAP teachers from an epistemological and sociocultural perspective using a phenomenological research method?

Abstract section 3: Content/method

Six teachers of the EAP subject in a Philippine university Senior High School setting participated as raters in a think-aloud marking session, post-marking interview, and reflection writing. As a phenomenological descriptive study, Bingham and Witkowsky’s (as cited in Vanover, 2022) five analysis cycles, Saldana’s (2021) two coding cycles, and Mayring’s (2022) qualitative content analysis process were used on the 36 written corrective feedback (WCF) on concept papers with think aloud transcripts and six reflection notes.

Title Unmasking the Hidden World of the EAP Rater's Cognition
Teaching Context College and university education

Author

Kristina Isabelle Valerio (University of Santo Tomas - Manila)

Presentation materials

There are no materials yet.