Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Comparative study of holistic and analytical marking
Authors: Lam, Peter Tit-Loong
Foong, Yoke Yeen
Issue Date: 1986
Citation: Teaching and Learning, 7(1)82-86
Abstract: There is much difference in opinion in the scoring of essays concerning the different aspects of an essay one should look for.
In a review of studies in the area of scoring of essays, Purves(1984) mentioned three studies addressing to this issue. The
holistic or Diederich approach involved a rating method whereby factors pertinent to an essay are rated on a &point scale. Five
common factors emerged - the quality and development of ideas, organisation, style or flavour, wording and mechanics. Carroll (1960) used a set of preestablished scales involving over 50 pairs of adjectives (also called the semantic differential)and 6 continua exist: good-bad, personal-impersonal, ornamentalplain, abstract-concrete, serious-humorous and characterising-narrating.
The Purves-Rippere (1968) study advocated a content analytical approach whereby 3 general criteria are used: effect on the reader, formal qualities, and scope and significance of the author's vision.
This paper is an attempt to adapt and modify the holistic method of Diederich and the analytical method of Purves-Rippere in the Singapore context (see Appendix).
ISSN: 0129-7112
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles - Teaching and Learning

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
TL-7-1-82.pdf58.9 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s) 50

checked on Feb 24, 2018

Download(s) 5

checked on Feb 24, 2018