Abstract
This study aims to follow an argument-based approach to validation of using automated essay evaluation (AWE) system with the example of Pigai, a Chinese AWE program, in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing assessment in China. First, an interpretive argument was developed for its use in the course of College English. Second, three sub-studies were conducted to seek evidence of claims related to score evaluation, score generalization, score explanation, score extrapolation and feedback utilization. Major findings are: (1) Pigai yields scores that are accurate indicators of the quality of a test performance sample; (2) its scores are consistent across tasks in the same form; (3) its scoring features represent the construct of interest to some extent, yet problems of construct under-representation and construct-irrelevant features still exist; (4) its scores are consistent with teachers’ judgments of students’ writing ability; (5) its feedback has a positive impact on students’ development of writing ability, but to some extent. These results reveal that AWE can only be used as a supplement to human evaluation, but can never replace the latter.
This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, P. R. China (Number 17YJC740102) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Number 2018PY22).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Warschauer, M.: Automated writing evaluation: defining the classroom research agenda. Lang. Teach. Res. 10, 1–24 (2006)
Valenti, S., Neri, F., Cucchiarelli, A.: An overview of current research on automated essay grading. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res. 2, 319–330 (2003)
Xi, X.: Automated scoring and feedback systems: where are we and where are we heading? Lang. Test. 27, 291–300 (2010)
Williamson, D.M., Xi, X., Breyer, F.J.: A framework for evaluation and use of automated scoring. Educ. Meas.: Issues Pract. 31, 2–13 (2012)
Zhang, Z.: Student engagement with computer-generated feedback: a case study. ELT J. 70, 1–12 (2016)
Bai, L., Hu, G.: In the face of fallible AWE feedback: how do students respond? Educ. Psychol. 37, 67–81 (2017)
Zhang, J.: Same text different processing? Exploring how raters’ cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies influence rating accuracy in essay scoring. Assessing Writ. 27, 37–53 (2016)
Linacre, J.M.: A User’s Guide to FACETS: Rasch-Model Computer Programs. MESA Press, Chicago (2005)
Green, A.: Verbal Protocol Analysis in Language Testing Research: A Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)
Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine de Gruyter, Chicago (1967)
McNamara, T.F.: Measuring Second Language Performance. Longman, London (1996)
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1: Task 1 (A Technological Invention)
Write an essay of no less than 150 words about a technological invention. Your writing should include four points: 1. An introduction of the invention. 2. Its positive impact on peoples’ life. 3. Its negative impact on people’s life. 4. Your opinion.
Appendix 2: Task 2 (Fame – Good or Evil?)
Write an essay of no less than 150 words on the topic “Fame-Good or Evil?” Your paper should cover the following points: 1. The advantages of being famous. 2. The disadvantages of being famous. 3. Your attitude towards fame.
Appendix 3: The Internet and Our Daily Lives
Write an essay of no less than 150 words on the topic “The Internet and Our Daily Lives”. Your paper should include: 1. Internet is important in our daily lives. 2. Internet has also disadvantages. 3. What shall we do to make better use of Internet?
Appendix 4: A Questionnaire of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Pigai
-
1.
Is Pigai score consistent with your observation of students’ writing ability?
A. Consistent B. Largely consistent C. Largely inconsistent D. Inconsistent
-
2.
Is Pigai’s feedback beneficial to improve students’ writing ability? Why?
-
3.
Would you like to let students receive Pigai’s feedback in the future? (Yes/No).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Xu, Y. (2018). Investigating the Validity of Using Automated Writing Evaluation in EFL Writing Assessment. In: Hao, T., Chen, W., Xie, H., Nadee, W., Lau, R. (eds) Emerging Technologies for Education. SETE 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11284. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03580-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03580-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03579-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03580-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)