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.

More blogs from ÃÛÌÒapp

  • A teacher sat at a table with students helping them work

    GSE Teacher Toolkit: Teaching mixed ability classes

    By Sara Davila
    Reading time: 4 minutes

    One of the biggest challenges for language teachers is teaching a mixed ability class. Students with different levels and abilities will always be present in our classrooms. So, how can we use the to improve mixed ability teaching? Let’s find out.Ìý

    How to teach mixed-ability classes

    Differentiated instruction is the best way to address the challenges of mixed ability classrooms. This is a method that helps teachers adjust aspects of the curriculum to match the different levels ofÌýstudents.*ÌýThis practice ensures that all learners are meeting course outcomes, even though their learning experience may be varied andÌýdifferent.

    In order to differentiate instruction and support students with different needs, teachers can change:Ìý

    • the content being taughtÌýÌý
    • the process used to teachÌýÌý
    • the product students createÌýÌý
    • the environment where learning takes place

    Adjusting the content tends to be the most obvious way to support learners. So, teachers who want to engage with differentiated instruction in mixed ability classrooms often find themselves producing a lot of content. This is greatÌýas a way toÌýsupport learners. However, creating new content or leveling existing content is time-consuming, and it can become a real challenge for teachers.ÌýÌý

    Content vs process

    Instead of adjusting your content, you can use the GSE Teacher Toolkit to adjust your process. When you’re not creating lots of new content, you’ve got more time to consider how to teach new language to your students and how they can show what they’ve learned.ÌýThe GSE Teacher Toolkit helps teachers to focus on the process and language production of learners, rather than the content you are teaching.Ìý

    This means less work for you, and more engagement from your students, no matter what their level is. And the GSE Teacher Toolkit can help you understand the skills we can expect students to demonstrate. So how does this work in practice? Let’sÌýtake a look.Ìý

  • Teacher stood at the front of the class writing on a interactive whiteboard

    GSE Teacher Toolkit: Planning a communicative grammar lesson

    By Sara Davila
    Reading time: 4 minutes

    Planning grammar lessons with the GSE Teacher Toolkit

    Grammar is one of the core areas of language teaching. Often, new teachers are nervous about teaching it, but sooner or later, all English teachers will have to get to grips with it. Whether you love or hate teaching grammar to your students, the makes planning a successful grammar lesson easier than ever.Ìý

    When it comes to planning a grammar-focused lesson, there are two main strategies to choose from: a communicative approach or a focus-on-form approach. The communicative approach is more commonly used.Ìý

    So, let’s have a look at how the GSE Teacher Toolkit can help you plan a communicative grammar lesson that is effective and engaging for your students.Ìý

    Teaching communicative grammar

    When you’re planning a grammar lesson, you want to be sure there is a reason for students to use the grammar point that you’re going to teach. That way, your students will be more motivated to learn the form and practise using it correctly.Ìý

    Using and applying grammar generally requires producing something. That’s why grammar, as an enabling skill, is often aligned to speaking and writing, the productive skills. When you want your students to use or produce a particular grammar form, you can begin by looking for the associated skills in speaking and writing.Ìý

    Choosing a skill to teach

    Imagine that you have a class that is learning at an A2 level (35 - 40 on the GSE range). You’ll want to help them work towards A2+/B1. So, it’s a good idea to plan lessons around skills that are in your target GSE range to push their progress.Ìý

    In order to plan an A2+ range speaking class, you can filter the GSE Teacher Toolkit to look in your target learning range for specific skills to teach:Ìý

  • Students sat at a desk looking at a textbook together, with a teacher pointing to it

    Real-world English: How GSE Job Profiles bridge learning and work

    By Sara Davila
    Reading time: 5 minutes

    Did you know that improving your English proficiency can increase earning potential by up to 50% and safeguard your career against AI? Recent research by ÃÛÌÒapp highlights that English is not just a skill but a career-defining advantage in today’s globalized workplace. For millions of adult learners, the journey from the classroom to the workplace requires more than general conversational abilities—it’s about gaining targeted, job-ready skills as quickly as possible. For English language educators, understanding what “j´Ç²ú-°ù±ð²¹»å²â†English is and how to identify “j´Ç²ú-°ù±ð²¹»å²â†skills can provide a significant advantage in ensuring learners are prepared to communicate effectively and collaborate with their future coworkers.

    That’s where the Global Scale of English (GSE) Job Profiles comes in. For educators and program developers, it offers a bridge between real-world job skills and the English learners need to perform them. Whether you’re creating programs for nursing assistants, hospitality workers, or IT professionals, this tool ensures that learners build the precise English skills they need to thrive in their roles.

    Let’s walk through how to create a GSE Job Profile and explore its practical use for building programs that align with today’s professional realities.