The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability of a common school choral festival adjudication form with that of a second form that is a more descriptive extension of the first. Specific research questions compare the interrater reliabilities of each form, the differences in mean scores of all dimensions between the forms, and the concurrent validity of the forms. Analysis of correlations between all possible pairs of four judges determined that the interrater reliability of the second form was stronger than that of the traditional form. Moderate correlations between the two forms further support the notion that the two forms measured the dimensions in somewhat different ways, suggesting the second form offered more specific direction in the evaluation of the choral performances. The authors suggest continued development of language and descriptors within a rubric that might result in increased levels of interrater reliability and validity in each dimension.
Norris, Charles E. and Borst, James D., "An Examination of the Reliabilities of Two Choral Festival Adjudication Forms" (2007). Peer Reviewed Articles. 4.