Abstract
Reliable, consistent assessment process that produces comparable assessment grades between assessors and institutions is a core activity and an ongoing challenge with which universities have failed to come to terms. In this paper, we report results from an experiment that tests the impact of an intervention designed to reduce grader variability and develop a shared understanding of national threshold learning standards by a cohort of reviewers. The intervention involved consensus moderation of samples of accounting students’ work, with a focus on three research questions. First, what is the quantifiable difference in grader variability on the assessment of learning outcomes in ‘application skills’ and ‘judgement’? Second, does participation in the workshops lead to reduced disparity in the assessment of the students’ learning outcomes in ‘application skills’ and ‘judgement’? Third, does participation in the workshops lead to greater confidence by reviewers in their ability to assess students’ skills in application skills and judgement? Our findings suggest consensus moderation does reduce variability across graders and also builds grader confidence.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Australian Business Deans’ Council, the Australian Government Office for Teaching and Learning, CPA Australia and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia for their financial support for this project. We also appreciate the cooperation of the numerous accounting programmes that have participated in this national initiative. We would also like to thank delegates and discussants at the European Accounting Association Annual Meeting in Paris in 2013, the International Association for Accounting Education and Research Conference (IAAER) in Amsterdam in 2012 and the Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand (AFAANZ) Annual Meeting in Perth in 2013 for their helpful input into earlier drafts of this paper.