<> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Thesis> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Article> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/title> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/abstract> "Grading standards for high-stakes national assessments in England are set using statistics and examiner judgement. Research highlighting the limitations of examiner judgement has eroded trust in this evidence, and statistical evidence has come to predominate. Nevertheless, there is a compelling case for retaining a judgemental element. The industry is thus exploring alternative methods of eliciting judgements.\r\n\r\nOne option is comparative judgement. However, comparative judgement lacks a coherent and well-established theoretical basis that sets out “what good looks like” – both in terms of how validity is understood, and what that means for designing and conducting comparative judgement exercises. This study therefore has two research questions. First, how do comparative judgement practitioners conceptualise validity? Second, how do practitioners use this conceptualisation to inform their design choices for comparative judgement exercises?\r\n\r\nI conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 comparative judgement practitioners and analysed the interviews using constructivist grounded theory. There were four key findings: \r\n•\tBest practice is highly contextualised, but is underpinned by a common process;\r\n•\tThe assessment construct defines and is defined by expert judges;\r\n•\tPractitioners indirectly exert power over the assessment construct;\r\n•\tPractitioners operationalise validity as the fidelity with which the construct is translated into practice. \r\n\r\nLike judgemental evidence in standard setting, comparative judgement has tended to be used when conventional methods have failed. As such, comparative judgement is unlikely to resolve the tensions around using examiner judgement in standard setting. I conclude that the examinations industry should not focus on how to improve examiner judgement, but instead consider under what conditions it would trust in examiner judgement."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/date> "2025-02-28" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-a64c3df5861c6582807add1abaadf2af> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Organization> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-a64c3df5861c6582807add1abaadf2af> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "UCL (University College London)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/issuer> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-a64c3df5861c6582807add1abaadf2af> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-90393ee88ff1c20337460541ea7367d2> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Organization> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-90393ee88ff1c20337460541ea7367d2> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Curriculum, Pedagogy & Assessment, UCL Institute of Education, UCL (University College London)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-90393ee88ff1c20337460541ea7367d2> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-a64c3df5861c6582807add1abaadf2af> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/issuer> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-90393ee88ff1c20337460541ea7367d2> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-a64c3df5861c6582807add1abaadf2af> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/org/ext-90393ee88ff1c20337460541ea7367d2> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status/unpublished> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326#authors> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326#authors> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#_1> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenName> "Katherine Mary"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/familyName> "Kelly"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/person/ext-72b8ef49c5662ca039cb7d7832ee1072> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Katherine Mary Kelly"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/EPrint> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/ThesisEPrint> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/repository> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Text)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasFile> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/13/Kelly_10204326_thesis.pdf> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/13/Kelly_10204326_thesis.pdf> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/13/Kelly_10204326_thesis.pdf> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Kelly_10204326_thesis.pdf"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824792> <http://eprints.org/relation/islightboxThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824793> <http://eprints.org/relation/ispreviewThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824794> <http://eprints.org/relation/ismediumThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824795> <http://eprints.org/relation/issmallThumbnailVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://eprints.org/ontology/Document> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label> "Practitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England (Other)"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> <http://eprints.org/relation/isVolatileVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824796> <http://eprints.org/relation/isIndexCodesVersionOf> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/document/1824787> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#seeAlso> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/> .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title> "HTML Summary of #10204326 \n\nPractitioners' understanding of validity in the context of comparative judgement: Implications for practice in standard setting for general qualifications in England\n\n" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/format> "text/html" .
<https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326/> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10204326> .