INTRODUCTION:

Rating is a term used to express the opinion or judgment regarding some performances of a
person, object, situation or character. The rating scale has qualitative description of some
aspects of traits of a person or a thing. When rating scales are used, we value an object by
absolute terms as against some specific criteria (e.g. we rate the properties of objects without
any reference to such similar objects)

DEFINITION:
Rating scale can be defined as “a standardized method of recording, interpretation of
behavior, which is totally based on behavior, strictly in line with the educational objectives.
It is a device used to evaluate situations or characteristics that can occur or be present in
varying degrees, rather than be merely present or absent as in the instrument so designed as to
facilitate appraisal of a number of traits or characteristics by reference to a common
quantitative scale of value.

TYPES OF RATING SCALES:

Various types of rating scales that are commonly used are:
1. Descriptive rating scale
2. Graphic rating scale
3. Numerical rating scale
4. Behaviorally anchored rating scale

Descriptive rating scale:

These types of rating scales use descriptive phrases to identify the points on a graphic scale.
The descriptions are brief details that convey in behavioral terms for each trait (how pupils
behave at different steps along the scale). The rater selects the one most applicable to the
person. A space for comment is also frequently provided to enable the rater to clarify the
rating or the record behavioral incidents pertinent to the rating.
For example:
Observation of working hours
Usually late sometimes late usually on time
Completion of work assignments
Usually late sometimes late usually on time

The frequency may take the form of:

 Abstract labels- such as A,B,C,D and E
 Frequency labels- such as always, usually, frequently, sometimes, never.
 Qualitative labels- superior, above average, average, below average

Graphic rating scale:

The rater indicates the performer’s standing in respect to each trait by placing a check mark at
an appropriate point along the line. In this, each line is followed by a horizontal line. The
rating is made by placing a tick on the line. A set of categories identify specific positions
along the line but the rater can also click between these points. Here the degree of each
character is arranged so that the rater can make as fine distinctions as he wishes to make.

Numerical rating scales:

In this, the extent or degree to which a particular attribute is present in an individual is
indicated by numbers. The observer puts a tick or circle on the number to which the student
possess that attribute. Each number is given a verbal description that remains constant for a
particular character. It includes numbers against which a list of behaviors is evaluated. This is
not a very reliable tool because of the inconsistent value attributed to the number. It can be
partially overcome by adding a few quantitative terms.

Ability to get along with others 1 2 3 4 5

Punctuality 1 2 3 4 5
Clinical performance 1 2 3 4 5
Communication skills 1 2 3 4 5
1= never
2= sometimes
3= about half the time
4= usually
5= always
Or
5= outstanding
4= above average
3= average
2= below average
1= dissatisfactory
The numerical rating scale is useful when the characteristics or qualities to be rated can
be classified in to a limited number of categories and when there is a general agreement
concerning the category represented by each number.

Behaviorally anchored rating scales:

BARS is an acronym for behaviorally anchored rating scales, sometimes known as BES,
behavioral expectation scales. BARS evaluates behavior relevant to specific demands of the
job and provide examples of specific job behaviors corresponding to good, average and poor
performances. This reduces the amount of personal judgment needed by the rater. Separate
BARS are needed for each job. BOS as an acronym for behavioral observation scales. This
system capitalizes on some of the strengths of BARS while avoiding some of the
disadvantages. The evaluator lists a number of critical incidents for each performance
dimension and rates the extent to which the behavior has been observed on a five point scale
ranging from almost never to almost always.

Punctual almost never 1 2 3 4 5 almost always

Gets along well with others almost never 1 2 3 4 5 almost always
 CONSTRUCTION OF A RATING SCALE

The following points must be kept in view:

1. A trial to be rated should be given a trait name and a definition. It will give the rater a
clear conception of the scale or the continuum along which he is to evaluate the
objects.

I. Traits should be described univocally, objectively and specifically

II. A trait that is to be rated should not be a composite of a number of traits that vary
independently.
III. Each trait should refer to a single type of activity or to the results of a single type of
activity.
IV. Traits should be grouped according to the accuracy with which they can be rated.
V. In describing traits, avoid the use of general terms such as very, extreme, average or
excellent.
VI. Traits should be judged on the basis of past or present accomplishments rather than
upon what the rater regards as future compromise.
VII. In self-rating there is no trait in which all individuals overestimate or underestimate
themselves.
VIII. Finally, do not use scales for traits on which reliable or more objective data can be
obtained.

2. A rating scale should make use of good cues. According to Gullford (1954) six
requirements are listed.

I. Clarity: Use short statements, in simple and unambiguous terminology.

II. Relevance: The cue should be consistent with the trait and its definition as well as
with other cues. Avoid bringing into a cue any implications of other traits.
III. Precision: A good cue applies to a point or a very short range on the continuum. There
should be no doubt about its rank position among other cues and if possible it should
not overlap them in quantitative meaning.
IV. Variety: The use of same terms in all or many of the cues may fail to differentiate
them sufficiently. Vary the language used at different scale levels.
V. Objectivity: Cues with implications of good or bad worthy or unworthy, desirable or
undesirable should generally be avoided.
VI. Uniqueness: The cues for each trait should be unique to that trait. Avoid using cues of
a very good general character, such as excellent, superior, average, poor etc.

3. There are no hard and fast rules concerning the number of steps or scale divisions to
be used in rating scale divisions to be used in rating scales. If the numbers of steps are
too small, the raters are not capable of making much discrimination, on the other
hand, too many steps in the scale beyond the rater’s power of discrimination. In
general 6-7 point scales seem to serve adequately.
PRINCIPLES IN PREPARING RATING SCALE:
1. Rating scales should directly relate to learning objectives.
2. They need to be confined to performance areas that can be observed.
3. Three to seven rating positions may need to be provided.
4. The scale may be made more objective, valid and reliable by getting a pooled rating
from more than one observer.
5. All raters should be oriented to the specific scale as well as the process of rating in
general.
6. As errors are common due to subjective judgment made by the observer, rater should
be conscious enough to avoid them.
7. A rating scale provides the instructor with a convenient form on which to record
judgments indicating the degree of student performance. This differs from a checklist
in that it allows for more discrimination in judging behaviors as compared with
dichotomous Yes or No options.

USES OF RATING SCALES

The uses may be classified into three evaluation areas:
1. Procedure
2. Product
3. Personal social development

1) Procedure evaluation: In many areas, achievement is expressed specifically through

student performance. Examples include ability to give health education, work effectively in a
group, performing various procedure, etc. Such activities do not result in a product that can
be evaluated and paper and pencil tests are generally inadequate. Consequently, the procedure
used in the performance itself must be observed and judged. Rating scales are especially
useful in evaluating procedures because they focus on the same aspect of performance in all
pupils and have a common scale on which to record judgments.

2) Product evaluation: when pupil performance results in some product, it is frequently

more desirable to judge the product rather than the performance. The ability to make a model
of sanitory well, for example, is best evaluated by judging the quality of the product itself.
Little is to be evaluated by observing the student’s performance.

3) Evaluating personal social development: one of the most common uses of rating scales
in the schools is rating various aspects of personal-social development. Rating personal social
characteristics is quite different from procedure and product evaluation. When judging
procedures and products, the ratings are usually made during or immediately after a period of
observation. In contrast, ratings of personal-social development are typically obtained at
periodic intervals and represent a kind of summing up of teacher’s general impressions.
ADVANTAGES OF RATING SCALE:
1. Rating scales are easy to administer and score.
2. They can be used for large number of students.
3. They have a wide range of application.
4. They give a clear feedback to the students.
5. They are used to evaluate skills, product outcomes, activities, interests, attitudes and
personal characteristics.
6. It is used to observe and record qualitative and quantitative judgments about observed
performance.
7. They tend to be adaptable and flexible.
8. They are efficient and economical in the use of time.
9. They can help to reduce the subjectivity and unreliability that are usually associated
with the observation method.
10. It will direct observation towards specific aspects of behavior.
11. It will provide a common frame of reference for comparing all pupils on the same set
of characteristics.
12. It will provide a convenient method for recording the observer’s judgment.

LIMITATIONS FOR RATING SCALE:

1. It is difficult or dangerous to fix up rating about many aspects of an individual.
2. Halo effect in the judgment may take place.
3. Chances like the rater may over estimate the qualities of a known person and
underestimate those of unknown persons.
4. The rater does not want to make extreme judgment chances of subjective evaluation;
thus the scales may become unscientific and unreliable.

CONCLUSION:
A rating scale is an aid to disciplined dialogue. It’s precisely defined format focuses the
conversation between the respondent and the questionnaire on the relevant areas. All
respondents are invited to communicate in the shared language of the specified option
choices. Ambiguity and uncertainty however remain.
REFERENCE:
BOOKS:
1. Sharma KS. Nursing research and statistics. 2 nd edition. New Delhi, India: Reed
Elsevier India private ltd; 2014. p. 270-273.
2. Sudha R. Nursing education principles and concepts. 1st ed. New Delhi, India: Jaypee
brothers medical publishers (p) ltd; 2013. p. 181-183.
3. Neeraja KP. Textbook of nursing education. 1st edition. New Delhi, India: Jaypee
brothers medical publishers (p) ltd; 2003. p. 430-431.
INTERNET:
1. Andrew S. Rating scale. 2011. Available at url:
http://www.gpea.org.transitions_assessments.html
2. Jerling FK. Rating scales. 2011. Available at url:
http://methods.sagepub.com.ratingscales/systematic/data_collection/n8.xml
 SANKAR MADHAB COLLEGE OF NURSING

PRESENTATION
IN
NURSING EDUCATION

TOPIC: RATING SCALE

SUBMITTED TO:
MADAM JOLENE
LECTURER
DEPT. OF MENTAL HEALTH NURSING
SMCON

SUBMITTED BY:
CHUBAKATILA
ROLL NO: 4
1 YEAR M.SC (N)
ST

SMCON