Previous research shows a discrepancy between different teachers’ assessment of student theses. This might be an even larger problem in the context of teacher education, since teacher trainers originate from different disciplines. This study aims to investigate how different assessors prioritise between criteria for assessment. Criteria were elucidated using repertory grid interviews with teacher trainers. These criteria formed the basis for a web-based Qsort that was distributed to teacher trainers at three different universities. The 66 teacher trainers in this study represented different disciplines, but were all engaged in the supervision and examination of student theses from teacher education programmes. The analysis revealed three different factors, which have been labelled: logic text structure as product, research process as product and results as product. The differences may not be explained by the background (e.g. discipline, university or gender) of the teacher trainers. Together, these three factors explain why teachers assessing student theses may accentuate different personal criteria. Hence, this might impact on their grading practice and also the interrater reliability.

先前的研究表明，不同教师对学生论文的评估​​之间存在差异。在教师教育的背景下，这可能是一个更大的问题，因为教师培训师来自不同的学科。本研究旨在调查不同的评估者如何在评估标准之间确定优先顺序。通过与教师培训人员进行的节目单网格访谈来阐明标准。这些标准构成了基于Web的Qsort的基础，该Qsort已分发给三所不同大学的教师培训师。本研究中的66名教师培训师代表了不同的学科，但都参与了对来自教师教育计划的学生论文的监督和检查。分析揭示了三个不同的因素，这些因素被标记为：逻辑文本结构作为产品，研究过程作为产品，结果作为产品。差异可能无法由教师培训师的背景（例如学科，大学或性别）来解释。这三个因素共同解释了为什么教师评估学生论文可能会强调不同的个人标准。因此，这可能会影响他们的评分实践以及interinterter可靠性。