IMPROVING OBJECTIVITY IN ASSESSMENT FOR CRITICAL READING: LESSONS LEARNED FROM REGRADING PRACTICES AT FFL - HUFLIT

Abstract

The study analyzes the current state of assessment in Critical Reading courses by examining a case study of 12 regrading requests from English majors at HUFLIT. The results showed that 100% of the students received a score increase, primarily in the critical essay section. By comparing student performance, initial grading results and suggested answers, the research identifies three core causes: the "keyword-matching trap," the confusion between language proficiency and cognitive ability, and the lack of multi-dimensional rubrics. Consequently, the paper proposes strategic solutions, including standardized double-blind grading on computer-based systems and the development of open-ended rubrics to ensure fairness, validity, and reliability for thinking-based subjects in the digital age.