These online systems, such as the Adaptive Comparative Judgement System (ACJS) (Pollitt, 2012b) and the Pair-Wise Web Software (Humphry et al. 2013 2015), are based on Thurstone's (1927) law of comparative judgement and have dealt with many of the issues, that in the past inhibited the use of comparative judgement in assessment (Jones & Alcock, 2012; Pollitt, 2012a).
The issue of time in making comparative judgements was highlighted in a study by McMahon and Jones (2014), who investigated the use of comparative judgement in the assessment of a secondary school chemistry experiment.
In this paper we argue for the increased use of comparative judgement in the assessment of performance, particularly where creative expression is an integral component of that performance.
Studies in the use of comparative judgement and online technologies for the assessment and measurement of practical performance conducted by Edith Cowan University provide a context for further promoting its use in educational testing.
Over the last decade, a number of studies have examined nurses' knowledge and practice of pressure injury risk assessment (use of assessment tools and clinical judgement), prevention and management.
A viable solution to the assessment of integrity may lie in the use of Situational Judgement Tests (SJTs), where test-takers are presented with job-related scenarios and asked to indicate their response(s) according to predetermined options [ 13, 14].
Careful titration of drugs and use of clinical judgement most important in using medications safely.
Schick et al. [1] criticise the use of "expert judgement" in Pilling et al. [2].
A range of probabilistic methods for predicting soft coastal cliff recession has now been developed, including statistical techniques, process-based simulation and structured use of expert judgement.
It has been noted by Heldsinger and Humphry (2013) that until recently there has been little use of comparative judgement methods for educational purposes, probably because it has been considered time consuming, tedious and laborious (see Bramley et al., 1998).
Several researchers have found that assessors needed little training in the use of comparative judgement systems and the process, including those in which judges had not had specific assessor training (see Heldsinger & Humphry, 2013; McMahon & Jones, 2014; Pollitt, 2012a).
