AI scoring vs human scoring for language tests: What's the difference?

Charlotte Guest
A girl sat at a desk with a laptop and notepad studying and taking notes
Reading time: 6 minutes

When entering the world of language proficiency tests, test takers are often faced with a dilemma: Should they opt for tests scored by humans or those assessed by artificial intelligence (AI)? The choice might seem trivial at first, but understanding the differences between AI scoring and human language test scoring can significantly impact preparation strategy and, ultimately, determine test outcomes.

The human touch in language proficiency testing and scoring

Historically, language tests have been scored by human assessors. This method leverages the nuanced understanding that humans have of language, including idiomatic expressions, cultural references, and the subtleties of tone and even writing style, akin to the capabilities of the human brain. Human scorers can appreciate the creative and original use of language, potentially rewarding test takers for flair and originality in their answers. Scorers are particularly effective at evaluating progress or achievement tests, which are designed to assess a student's language knowledge and progress after completing a particular chapter, unit, or at the end of a course, reflecting how well the language tester is performing in their language learning studies.

One significant difference between human and AI scoring is how they handle context. Human scorers can understand the significance and implications of a particular word or phrase in a given context, while AI algorithms rely on predetermined rules and datasets.

The adaptability and learning capabilities of human brains contribute significantly to the effectiveness of scoring in language tests, mirroring how these brains adjust and learn from new information.

Advantages:

  • Nuanced understanding: Human scorers are adept at interpreting the complexities and nuances of language that AI might miss.
  • Contextual flexibility: Humans can consider context beyond the written or spoken word, understanding cultural and situational implications.

Disadvantages:

  • Subjectivity and inconsistency: Despite rigorous training, human-based scoring can introduce a level of subjectivity and variability, potentially affecting the fairness and reliability of scores.
  • Time and resource intensive: Human-based scoring is labor-intensive and time-consuming, often resulting in longer waiting times for results.
  • Human bias: Assessors, despite being highly trained and experienced, bring their own perspectives, preferences and preconceptions into the grading process. This can lead to variability in scoring, where two equally competent test takers might receive different scores based on the scorer's subjective judgment.

The rise of AI in language test scoring

With advancements in technology, AI-based scoring systems have started to play a significant role in language assessment. These systems utilize algorithms and natural language processing (NLP) techniques to evaluate test responses. AI scoring promises objectivity and efficiency, offering a standardized way to assess language and proficiency level.

Advantages:

  • Consistency: AI scoring systems provide a consistent scoring method, applying the same criteria across all test takers, thereby reducing the potential for bias.
  • Speed: AI can process and score tests much faster than human scorers can, leading to quicker results turnaround.
  • Great for more nervous testers: Not everyone likes having to take a test in front of a person, so AI removes that extra stress.

Disadvantages:

  • Lack of nuance recognition: AI may not fully understand subtle nuances, creativity, or complex structures in language the way a human scorer can.
  • Dependence on data: The effectiveness of AI scoring is heavily reliant on the data it has been trained on, which can limit its ability to interpret less common responses accurately.

Making the choice

When deciding between tests scored by humans or AI, consider the following factors:

  • Your strengths: If you have a creative flair and excel at expressing original thoughts, human-scored tests might appreciate your unique approach more. Conversely, if you excel in structured language use and clear, concise expression, AI-scored tests could work to your advantage.
  • Your goals: Consider why you're taking the test. Some organizations might prefer one scoring method over the other, so it's worth investigating their preferences.
  • Preparation time: If you're on a tight schedule, the quicker turnaround time of AI-scored tests might be beneficial.

Ultimately, both scoring methods aim to measure and assess language proficiency accurately. The key is understanding how each approach aligns with your personal strengths and goals.

The bias factor in language testing

An often-discussed concern in both AI and human language test scoring is the issue of bias. With AI scoring, biases can be ingrained in the algorithms due to the data they are trained on, but if the system is well designed, bias can be removed and provide fairer scoring.

Conversely speaking, human scorers, despite their best efforts to remain objective, bring their own subconscious biases to the evaluation process. These biases might be related to a test taker's accent, dialect, or even the content of their responses, which could subtly influence the scorer's perceptions and judgments. Efforts are continually made to mitigate these biases in both approaches to ensure a fair and equitable assessment for all test takers.

Preparing for success in foreign language proficiency tests

Regardless of the scoring method, thorough preparation remains, of course, crucial. Familiarize yourself with the test format, practice under timed conditions, and seek feedback on your performance, whether from teachers, peers, or through self-assessment tools.

The distinctions between AI scoring and human in language tests continue to blur, with many exams now incorporating a mix of both to have students leverage their respective strengths. Understanding and interpreting written language is essential in preparing for language proficiency tests, especially for reading tests. By understanding these differences, test takers can better prepare for their exams, setting themselves up for the best possible outcome.

Will AI replace human-marked tests?

The question of whether AI will replace markers in language tests is complex and multifaceted. On one hand, the efficiency, consistency and scalability of AI scoring systems present a compelling case for their increased utilization. These systems can process vast numbers of tests in a fraction of the time it takes markers, providing quick feedback that is invaluable in educational settings. On the other hand, the nuanced understanding, contextual knowledge, flexibility, and ability to appreciate the subtleties of language that human markers bring to the table are qualities that AI has yet to fully replicate.

Both AI and human-based scoring aim to accurately assess language proficiency levels, such as those defined by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the Global Scale of English, where a level like C2 or 85-90 indicates that a student can understand virtually everything, master the foreign language perfectly, and potentially have superior knowledge compared to a native speaker.

The integration of AI in language testing is less about replacement and more about complementing and enhancing the existing processes. AI can handle the objective, clear-cut aspects of language testing, freeing markers to focus on the more subjective, nuanced responses that require a human touch. This hybrid approach could lead to a more robust, efficient and fair assessment system, leveraging the strengths of both humans and AI.

Future developments in AI technology and machine learning may narrow the gap between AI and human grading capabilities. However, the ethical considerations, such as ensuring fairness and addressing bias, along with the desire to maintain a human element in education, suggest that a balanced approach will persist. In conclusion, while AI will increasingly play a significant role in language testing, it is unlikely to completely replace markers. Instead, the future lies in finding the optimal synergy between technological advancements and human judgment to enhance the fairness, accuracy and efficiency of language proficiency assessments.

Tests to let your language skills shine through

Explore ÃÛÌÒapp's innovative language testing solutions today and discover how we are blending the best of AI technology and our own expertise to offer you reliable, fair and efficient language proficiency assessments. We are committed to offering reliable and credible proficiency tests, ensuring that our certifications are recognized for job applications, university admissions, citizenship applications, and by employers worldwide. Whether you're gearing up for academic, professional, or personal success, our tests are designed to meet your diverse needs and help unlock your full potential.

Take the next step in your language learning journey with ÃÛÌÒapp and experience the difference that a meticulously crafted test can make.

Explore our wide range of English language tests

More blogs from ÃÛÌÒapp

  • A teacher stood by a long wooden desk where her students are sat smiling at her

    What¡¯s it like to teach English in France?

    By Steffanie Zazulak
    Reading time: 3 minutes

    Kirsty Murray taught English for a year at a coll¨¨ge (the French equivalent of a secondary school) in Villers-Cotter¨ºts: a town in the north of France known for being the birthplace of Alexandre Dumas. She taught mixed-ability groups of 11- to 16-year-olds, with classes ranging in size from 10 to 35 students. Here, she shares the five lessons she learned from the experience.

  • A teacher helping a teenage student working at her desk in a library

    How teachers can use the GSE for professional development

    By Fajarudin Akbar
    Reading time: 4.5 minutes

    As English teachers, we¡¯re usually the ones helping others grow. We guide learners through challenges, celebrate their progress and push them to reach new heights. But what about our own growth? How do we, as educators, continue to develop and refine our practice?

    The Global Scale of English (GSE) is often seen as a tool for assessing students. However, in my experience, it can also be a powerful guide for teachers who want to become more intentional, reflective, and confident in their teaching. Here's how the GSE has helped me in my own journey as an English teacher and how it can support yours too.

    About the GSE

    The GSE is a proficiency scale developed by ÃÛÌÒapp. It measures English ability across four skills ¨C listening, speaking, reading and writing ¨C on a scale from 10 to 90. It¡¯s aligned with the CEFR but offers more detailed learning objectives, which can be incredibly useful in diverse teaching contexts.

    I first encountered the GSE while exploring ways to better personalize learning objectives in my Business English classes. As a teacher in a non-formal education setting in Indonesia, I often work with students who don¡¯t fit neatly into one CEFR level. I needed something more precise, more flexible, and more connected to real classroom practice. That¡¯s when the GSE became a turning point.

    Reflecting on our teaching practice

    The GSE helped me pause and reflect. I started reading through the learning objectives and asking myself important questions. Were my lessons really aligned with what learners at this level needed? Was I challenging them just enough or too much?

    By using the GSE as a mirror, I began to see areas where I could improve. For example, I realized that, although I was confident teaching speaking skills, I wasn¡¯t always giving enough attention to writing development. The GSE didn¡¯t judge me. It simply showed me where I could grow.

    Planning with purpose

    One of the best things about the GSE is that it brings clarity to lesson planning. Instead of guessing whether an activity is suitable for a student¡¯s level, I now check the GSE objectives. If I know a learner is at GSE 50 in speaking, I can design a role-play that matches that level of complexity. If another learner is at GSE 60, I can challenge them with more open-ended tasks.

    Planning becomes easier and more purposeful. I don¡¯t just create lessons, I design learning experiences that truly meet students where they are.

    Collaborating with other teachers

    The GSE has also become a shared language for collaboration. When I run workshops or peer mentoring sessions, I often invite teachers to explore the GSE Toolkit together. We look at learning objectives, discuss how they apply to our learners, and brainstorm ways to adapt materials.

    These sessions are not just about theory: they¡¯re energizing. Teachers leave with new ideas, renewed motivation and a clearer sense of how to bring their teaching to the next level.

    Getting started with the GSE

    If you¡¯re curious about how to start using the GSE for your own growth, here are a few simple steps:

    • Visit the GSE Teacher Toolkit and explore the learning objectives for the skills and levels you teach.
    • Choose one or two objectives that resonate with you and reflect on whether your current lessons address them.
    • Try adapting a familiar activity to better align with a specific GSE range.
    • Use the GSE when planning peer observations or professional learning communities. It gives your discussions a clear focus.

    Case study from my classroom

    I once had a private Business English student preparing for a job interview. Her speaking skills were solid ¨C around GSE 55 ¨C but her writing was more limited, probably around GSE 45. Instead of giving her the same tasks across both skills, I personalized the lesson.

    For speaking, we practiced mock interviews using complex questions. For writing, I supported her with guided sentence frames for email writing. By targeting her actual levels, not just a general CEFR level, she improved faster and felt more confident.

    That experience reminded me that when we teach with clarity, learners respond with progress.

    Challenges and solutions

    Of course, using the GSE can feel overwhelming at first. There are many descriptors, and it can take time to get familiar with the scale. My advice is to start small: focus on one skill or one level. Also, use the Toolkit as a companion, not a checklist.

    Another challenge is integrating the GSE into existing materials, and this is where technology can help. I often use AI tools like ChatGPT to adjust or rewrite tasks so they better match specific GSE levels. This saves time and makes differentiation easier.

    Teachers deserve development too

    Teaching is a lifelong journey. The GSE doesn¡¯t just support our students, it also supports us. It helps us reflect, plan, and collaborate more meaningfully. Most of all, it reminds us that our growth as teachers is just as important as the progress of our learners.

    If you¡¯re looking for a simple, practical, and inspiring way to guide your professional development, give the GSE a try. It helped me grow, and I believe it can help you too.

    Additional resources

  • A woman sat on a sofa with a tv controller

    Five great film scenes that can help improve your English

    By Steffanie Zazulak

    Watching films can be a great way for people to learn English. We all have our favourite movie moments and, even as passive viewers, they're probably teaching you more than you realise. Here's a selection of our favourite scenes, along with the reasons why they're educational as well as entertaining.

    ?