Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract In earlier work of Project Essay Grade (PEG) we used computers to evaluate prose of high school students. In major experiments, PEG successfully imitated single human ratings, despite the crude hardware and software of the late 1960s. Today, computers are common in home and school, and advanced software packages permit much more powerful analysis. In the present research we analyzed recent federal samples of 495 and 599 essays and simulated groups of human judges, reaching multiple Rs as high as .87, close to the apparent reliability of the targeted judge groups. We also generated weights from formative samples of two thirds each, which predicted well the other one-third samples (with simple rs higher than .84). Another cross-validation predicted across different years, students, and judge panels, with an r of .83. Thus, the computer surpassed two judges, which is the usual human panel. Results appear encouraging for further research and indeed for early application to large programs of essay evaluation and reporting.
Ellis B. Page (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: