Difference between revisions of "National Origin or National Location"

From Penn Center for Learning Analytics Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Added Entry)
(terminology corrections)
 
(27 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Bridgeman, Trapani, and Attali (2009) [[https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.577.7573&rep=rep1&type=pdf pdf]]


* E-Rater system that automatically grades a student’s essay
Ogan et al. (2015) [https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40593-014-0034-8.pdf pdf]
* Inaccurately high scores were given to Chinese and Korean students


* Multi-national models predicting learning gains from student's help-seeking behavior
* Models built on only U.S. or combined data sets performed extremely poorly for Costa Rica
* Models performed better when built on and applied for the same country, except for Philippines where model built on that country which was outperformed slightly by model built on U.S. data


Bridgeman, Trapani, and Attali (2012) [pdf]


* A later version of E-Rater system for automatic grading of GSE essay
 
* Chinese students were given higher scores than when graded by human essay raters
Li et al. (2021) [https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.15212.pdf pdf]
 
* Model predicting student achievement on the standardized examination PISA
* Inaccuracy of the U.S.-trained model was greater for students from countries with lower scores of national development (e.g. Indonesia, Vietnam, Moldova)
 
 
Wang et al. (2018) [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336009443_Monitoring_the_performance_of_human_and_automated_scores_for_spoken_responses pdf]
 
* Automated scoring model for evaluating English spoken responses
* SpeechRater gave a significantly lower score than human raters for German students
* SpeechRater scored gave higher scores than human raters for Chinese students, with H1-rater scores higher than mean
 
 
Bridgeman et al. (2009) [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242203403_Considering_Fairness_and_Validity_in_Evaluating_Automated_Scoring page]
 
* Automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
 
* E-Rater gave significantly better scores than human rater for TOEFL essays (independent task) written by speakers of Chinese and Korean
* E-Rater correlated poorly with human rater and gave better scores than human rater for GRE essays (both issue and argument prompts) written by Chinese speakers
 
 
 
Bridgeman et al. (2012) [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08957347.2012.635502?needAccess=true pdf]
 
* A later version of automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
* E-rater gave  better scores for test-takers from Chinese speakers (Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong) and Korean speakers when assessing TOEFL (independent prompt) essay
* E-rater gave lower scores for Arabic, Hindi, and Spanish speakers when assessing their written responses to independent prompt in TOEFL

Latest revision as of 06:04, 10 June 2022

Ogan et al. (2015) pdf

  • Multi-national models predicting learning gains from student's help-seeking behavior
  • Models built on only U.S. or combined data sets performed extremely poorly for Costa Rica
  • Models performed better when built on and applied for the same country, except for Philippines where model built on that country which was outperformed slightly by model built on U.S. data


Li et al. (2021) pdf

  • Model predicting student achievement on the standardized examination PISA
  • Inaccuracy of the U.S.-trained model was greater for students from countries with lower scores of national development (e.g. Indonesia, Vietnam, Moldova)


Wang et al. (2018) pdf

  • Automated scoring model for evaluating English spoken responses
  • SpeechRater gave a significantly lower score than human raters for German students
  • SpeechRater scored gave higher scores than human raters for Chinese students, with H1-rater scores higher than mean


Bridgeman et al. (2009) page

  • Automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
  • E-Rater gave significantly better scores than human rater for TOEFL essays (independent task) written by speakers of Chinese and Korean
  • E-Rater correlated poorly with human rater and gave better scores than human rater for GRE essays (both issue and argument prompts) written by Chinese speakers


Bridgeman et al. (2012) pdf

  • A later version of automated scoring models for evaluating English essays, or e-rater
  • E-rater gave better scores for test-takers from Chinese speakers (Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong) and Korean speakers when assessing TOEFL (independent prompt) essay
  • E-rater gave lower scores for Arabic, Hindi, and Spanish speakers when assessing their written responses to independent prompt in TOEFL
Retrieved from "https://www.pcla.wiki/index.php?title=National_Origin_or_National_Location&oldid=357"