Assessing the Quality of Argumentative Texts: Examining the General Agreement Between Different Rating Procedures and Exploring Inferences of (Dis)agreement Cases

Assessing argumentative writing skills is not a straightforward task, as multiple elements need to be considered. In function of providing feedback students and keeping track their progress, evaluating texts in suitable, valid efficient way important. this state-of-the-art exploratory study, 130 written by eleventh graders were assessed means three different rating procedures (i.e., absolute holistic rating, comparative analytic rating). The main aim study twofold. First, we examine the correlations between extent which these differ assigning scores. doing so, more innovative approach pairwise comparisons compared established assessment methods rating. Second, identify key characteristics that determine quality an text, independent procedure used. Furthermore, mid-range, weak strong studied detail. results reveal low moderate agreement procedures, indicating all are suitable assess text; each procedure, however, has its own qualities applicability.