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

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 sat with a student at his desk, the student is writing and the teacher is looking at him doing this smiling.

    7 ways to individualize your teaching

    By Andrew Walkley
    Reading time: 4 minutes

    There's no denying that tailoring your teaching to individual students is an effective strategy. However, many teachers struggle with finding the time to include teaching moments which address an individual learner's specific needs. So, what's the best way to create an individualized classroom? Andrew Walkley, co-author of Roadmap, explains the benefits of this approach and shares some techniques to ensure that every student gets the most out of your lessons.Ìý

    The best of both worlds?

    First of all, what does individualized teaching mean? It's the concept that students will learn most effectively when the activity is specific to their needs and the language they are using is appropriate for their level. This concept is sometimes seen in opposition to coursebooks and class-based learning, where students are all expected to follow the same syllabus. However, class syllabuses and coursebooks have the following benefits:

    • Providing students with common goalsÌý
    • Encouraging learners to follow an unfamiliar topic that then opens new doors of learning
    • The learning opportunities in peer-to-peer explanationÌý

    When we talk about individualized teaching in the classroom, we want to exploit the benefits of learning together while also providing opportunities for more individualized development. So, how can you, as a teacher, combine the two approaches?

    1. Involve students in choosing your route

    All classroom groups are different and made up of people from different age groups with distinct needs and interests. Roadmap can help in two ways:

    1. There is a fast and slow track. The fast track focuses on language input and speaking. The slow track has additional skills lessons at the back of the book that are thematically linked to the corresponding fast track lesson.Ìý
    2. Each lesson has a clear goal and final task. For shorter courses, get each student to choose three tasks they would definitely like to do. Based on the results, you can prioritize those lessons.

    At the start of the course, make a point of asking about students' learning priorities and then plan accordingly. Once you've completed an input and speaking lesson, you can ask the students if they want to further explore the topic through the skills lesson.

    2. Make use of tasks

    Open tasks, where students exchange their own ideas in a meaningful way, are a key part of individualized lessons. In essence, they are self-differentiating because each student will attempt to complete the task using whatever language they are able to use. In Roadmap, each of the main lessons ends with a clear task connected to a Global Scale of English (GSE) can-do statement. However, there are also lots of other speaking opportunities without a 'speaking' label (under vocabulary or reading, etc.), as well as the conversation that typically occurs in any lesson, all of which can be treated as open tasks.

    3. Give individualized feedback and then share it

    In a group setting, it's impossible to give individual feedback on every single task. However, you can give individual attention to different people throughout the lesson. Make yourself available to give students the language they need as it arises during an activity. Then, when they've completed the task, write some of these examples on the board, but leave a gap for the keywords. Elicit these keywords from other members of the class. If they can't get it, ask the student(s) you helped to explain the missing language. You might then repeat the task, but this time, pay attention to a new group.Ìý

    4. Check what vocabulary students know

    All coursebook writers and teachers make choices about what vocabulary to introduce to students. In the case of Roadmap we are guided by the GSE and teachers might like to experiment themselves using the GSE Teacher Toolkit. However, all students will have their own lexicons. You can individualize learning better by asking students to rate the words you aim to cover in a unit according to whether they know them or not. For example, 1 = it's completely new, 2 = the meaning is familiar but I don't use it, 3 = this is part of my productive vocabulary.Ìý

    5. Get students to create their own word lists and cards

    This knowledge will enable you to encourage students to focus on their individual vocabulary needs. They can reinforce learning by developing a word list or making flashcards using a web tool such as Quizlet. For new words they may have a word/collocation with an L1 translation.

    With familiar vocabulary, they could have cards with a keyword on one side and varied collocations or common examples on the other (also in English). It's worth setting aside some time in class to do this at the start of a course. If your students are engaged and motivated, it can become a regular discipline for learning new vocabulary.Ìý

    6. Ask more open questions about usage, not just meaning

    When we do vocabulary tasks from the course material in class, we can use open questions to individualize learning with the following two techniques. Firstly, as you go through the answers, rather than going in order 1 to 8, you can nominate people to give the answer that they're most unsure of and want to check. Secondly, we can ask the rest of the class open questions which focus on how words are used. For example, take these questions from different vocabulary exercises in Roadmap B1+:

    • What (other) things might you spill?
    • Why might a character in a series be killed off?
    • What (else) can you describe as reliable?
    • What can someone do to stay calm?Ìý

    You could also ask questions such as, "What's the opposite of staying calm?" or "What might you say if you spilled something?"

    When you ask these questions, you are checking meaning, but more importantly, you are also pushing students to reveal how well they know a word. Do they know the collocations of spill and reliable? Do they have the other language they might need to talk about the aspects of a TV series or help someone who is in a panic? You can then encourage students to choose how much of this potentially new language they want to add to their word lists.

    7. Provide open homework tasks and make time to share the results

    Homework is another opportunity to individualize learning. Give students a wide choice of tasks based on the material of the course or beyond, for example:

    • Choose any number of exercises they want to do from workbook materialÌý
    • Find and read one article they are interested in (in L1 or L2)
    • Write five things they want to learn how to say in English (perhaps using Google Translate)
    • Write up an interesting conversation they had in English (the conversation could be originally in L1 or L2)

    Whatever task they choose, the key is to dedicate some classroom time to discussing which homework task they did and why. Encourage them to explain their answers and what they learned through the task, and whether or not they would choose to do a similar task again.ÌýÌý

    For a more detailed introduction on how you can individualize your teaching, check out Andrew's webinar:Ìý