Scheduled for Research Consortium Poster Social: Representative Research in HPERD, Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 4:30 PM - 6:00 PM, Convention Center: Exhibit Hall Poster Area I


Comparison of Holistic and Analytic Rating Approaches on the Assessment of Dance Performance

Sang-Jo Kang, Korea National Sport University, Seoul, South Korea, Kyu-Ja Hwang, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea, Yul-Ja Oh, Hanyang University, Ansan, Kyeonggi-do, South Korea and Youn-Sun Choi, Seoul Christian University, Seoul, South Korea

Traditionally, assessments on the dance performance were based on a holistic rating approach, meaning that there is one overall score instead of discrete domains. This approach, however, is limited in use in the field because it does not provide the feedback with a scale that includes multiple domains and is difficult to employ by nonexperts to judge performance. An alternative approach for assessing dance performance is to use analytic rating approach, which provides scores for individual performance at different domains and then combines the scores to obtain an overall total. The purpose of this study is to compare holistic and analytic ratings on assessing dance performance by experts and nonexperts. Eleven experts who worked in the area of dance more than 15 years and 30 female college-aged students (i.e., nonexperts) were recruited from Korea for this study. Dance assessment videos were used to compare holistic and analytic rating approaches by experts and students. For the analytic scoring approach, ten items that reflected five analytic domains (i.e., opus, technique, artistic presentation, rhythm, and talent for dance) were used. The coefficient of variation (CV), t-tests, and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated, and the significant level was set at .05. The descriptive statistics indicated that holistic ratings were 22.0 (SD=1.1) from experts and 20.8 (SD=1.6) from students, and analytic ratings were 37.0 (SD=2.0) from experts and 36.0 (SD=2.9) from students. The experts CV (5.0% for holistic and 5.4% for analytic) was lower than students CV (8.2% for holistic and 8.0% for analytic). This finding is expected because the experts' ratings were assumed to be more consistent than students' ratings. There was no significant mean difference between experts and students from analytic rating approach (t = 1.504; p = .165) while a significant mean difference was found from holistic rating approach (t = 2.275; p = .025). A moderately high correlation coefficient between holistic and analytic rating approaches was found from experts (r = .62), and a moderate correlation coefficient was found from students (r = .40). In conclusions, students' ratings based on analytic rating approach were quite similar to experts' ratings. It is suggested that analytic rating approach is recommended when assessing dance performance by nonexperts.
Keyword(s): assessment, dance, research

Back to the 2007 AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition (March 13 -- 17, 2007)