Assessment of Projects, Portfolios and Dissertations: Achieving Equity

A variety of different assessment formats has evolved in higher education in recent years - many inspired by task-related activities in the working environment. Some are not new: at Masters level, the dissertation is long-established whereas, at undergraduate level, projects and portfolios are proving increasingly popular. (Portfolios are particularly favoured for professional subjects.) Implementing these alternative forms of assessment is not always straightforward however - even when strict rubrics are applied. As a consequence, double-marking is frequently employed in an effort to reduce the subjectivity of marks awarded. Unfortunately, this strategy too can prove problematic – as recent studies have shown - especially when there is an irreconcilable disagreement between first and second examiners. In the article, we focus on this issue of inter-marker conflict and through a series of simple statistical models offer insights into how final marks might more fairly be determined.