Can computers really mark exams? Benefits of ELT automated assessments

app Languages
Hands typing at a laptop with symbols

Automated assessment, including the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), is one of the latest education tech solutions. It speeds up exam marking times, removes human biases, and is as accurate and at least as reliable as human examiners. As innovations go, this one is a real game-changer for teachers and students. 

However, it has understandably been met with many questions and sometimes skepticism in the ELT community – can computers really mark speaking and writing exams accurately? 

The answer is a resounding yes. Students from all parts of the world already take AI-graded tests.  aԻ Versanttests – for example – provide unbiased, fair and fast automated scoring for speaking and writing exams – irrespective of where the test takers live, or what their accent or gender is. 

This article will explain the main processes involved in AI automated scoring and make the point that AI technologies are built on the foundations of consistent expert human judgments. So, let’s clear up the confusion around automated scoring and AI and look into how it can help teachers and students alike. 

AI versus traditional automated scoring

First of all, let’s distinguish between traditional automated scoring and AI. When we talk about automated scoring, generally, we mean scoring items that are either multiple-choice or cloze items. You may have to reorder sentences, choose from a drop-down list, insert a missing word- that sort of thing. These question types are designed to test particular skills and automated scoring ensures that they can be marked quickly and accurately every time.

While automatically scored items like these can be used to assess receptive skills such as listening and reading comprehension, they cannot mark the productive skills of writing and speaking. Every student's response in writing and speaking items will be different, so how can computers mark them?

This is where AI comes in. 

We hear a lot about how AI is increasingly being used in areas where there is a need to deal with large amounts of unstructured data, effectively and 100% accurately – like in medical diagnostics, for example. In language testing, AI uses specialized computer software to grade written and oral tests. 

How AI is used to score speaking exams

The first step is to build an acoustic model for each language that can recognize speech and convert it into waveforms and text. While this technology used to be very unusual, most of our smartphones can do this now. 

These acoustic models are then trained to score every single prompt or item on a test. We do this by using human expert raters to score the items first, using double marking. They score hundreds of oral responses for each item, and these ‘Standards’ are then used to train the engine. 

Next, we validate the trained engine by feeding in many more human-marked items, and check that the machine scores are very highly correlated to the human scores. If this doesn’t happen for any item, we remove it, as it must match the standard set by human markers. We expect a correlation of between .95-.99. That means that tests will be marked between 95-99% exactly the same as human-marked samples. 

This is incredibly high compared to the reliability of human-marked speaking tests. In essence, we use a group of highly expert human raters to train the AI engine, and then their standard is replicated time after time.  

How AI is used to score writing exams

Our AI writing scoring uses a technology called . LSA is a natural language processing technique that can analyze and score writing, based on the meaning behind words – and not just their superficial characteristics. 

Similarly to our speech recognition acoustic models, we first establish a language-specific text recognition model. We feed a large amount of text into the system, and LSA uses artificial intelligence to learn the patterns of how words relate to each other and are used in, for example, the English language. 

Once the language model has been established, we train the engine to score every written item on a test. As in speaking items, we do this by using human expert raters to score the items first, using double marking. They score many hundreds of written responses for each item, and these ‘Standards’ are then used to train the engine. We then validate the trained engine by feeding in many more human-marked items, and check that the machine scores are very highly correlated to the human scores. 

The benchmark is always the expert human scores. If our AI system doesn’t closely match the scores given by human markers, we remove the item, as it is essential to match the standard set by human markers.

AI’s ability to mark multiple traits 

One of the challenges human markers face in scoring speaking and written items is assessing many traits on a single item. For example, when assessing and scoring speaking, they may need to give separate scores for content, fluency and pronunciation. 

In written responses, markers may need to score a piece of writing for vocabulary, style and grammar. Effectively, they may need to mark every single item at least three times, maybe more. However, once we have trained the AI systems on every trait score in speaking and writing, they can then mark items on any number of traits instantaneously – and without error. 

AI’s lack of bias

A fundamental premise for any test is that no advantage or disadvantage should be given to any candidate. In other words, there should be no positive or negative bias. This can be very difficult to achieve in human-marked speaking and written assessments. In fact, candidates often feel they may have received a different score if someone else had heard them or read their work.

Our AI systems eradicate the issue of bias. This is done by ensuring our speaking and writing AI systems are trained on an extensive range of human accents and writing types. 

We don’t want perfect native-speaking accents or writing styles to train our engines. We use representative non-native samples from across the world. When we initially set up our AI systems for speaking and writing scoring, we trialed our items and trained our engines using millions of student responses. We continue to do this now as new items are developed.

The benefits of AI automated assessment

There is nothing wrong with hand-marking homework tests and exams. In fact, it is essential for teachers to get to know their students and provide personal feedback and advice. However, manually correcting hundreds of tests, daily or weekly, can be repetitive, time-consuming, not always reliable and takes time away from working alongside students in the classroom. The use of AI in formative and summative assessments can increase assessed practice time for students and reduce the marking load for teachers.

Language learning takes time, lots of time to progress to high levels of proficiency. The blended use of AI can:

  • address the increasing importance of formative assessmentto drive personalized learning and diagnostic assessment feedback 

  • allow students to practice and get instant feedback inside and outside of allocated teaching time

  • address the issue of teacher workload

  • create a virtuous combination between humans and machines, taking advantage of what humans do best and what machines do best. 

  • provide fair, fast and unbiased summative assessment scores in high-stakes testing.

We hope this article has answered a few burning questions about how AI is used to assess speaking and writing in our language tests. An interesting quote from Fei-Fei Li, Chief scientist at Google and Stanford Professor describes AI like this:

“I often tell my students not to be misled by the name ‘artificial intelligence’ — there is nothing artificial about it; A.I. is made by humans, intended to behave [like] humans and, ultimately, to impact human lives and human society.”

AI in formative and summative assessments will never replace the role of teachers. AI will support teachers, provide endless opportunities for students to improve, and provide a solution to slow, unreliable and often unfair high-stakes assessments.

Examples of AI assessments in ELT

At app, we have developed a range of assessments using AI technology.

Versant

The Versant tests are a great tool to help establish language proficiency benchmarks in any school, organization or business. They are specifically designed for placement tests to determine the appropriate level for the learner.

PTE Academic

The  is aimed at those who need to prove their level of English for a university place, a job or a visa. It uses AI to score tests and results are available within five days. 

More blogs from app

  • A classroom with students sat at desks and one student stood at the front with the teacher

    Forward-looking reflective teaching

    By Ehsan Gorji

    Ehsan Gorji is an Iranian teacher, teacher trainer and teacher educator. He also designs strategic plans, devises study syllabuses, runs quality-check observations, and develops materials and tests for different language institutes and schools in the country. Ehsan has been a GSE Thought Leader and Expert Rater since 2016.

    Reflective teaching, despite it sounding modern and sophisticated, has not yet become a common practice among English language teachers. However, the experientialproposed byoffers a practical approach for teachers. The cycle involves teaching a lesson, reflecting on "what we did" and "how we did them," and then using that reflection to improve future English classes. By using this approach, teachers can prepare for better teaching in the long term.

  • A teacher stood at a board in a library with notes all over it, with his students in the background looking at him

    Mind the gap in your English lesson planning

    By Ehsan Gorji

    Professional English teachers love lesson planning. They can always teach a class using their full wardrobe of methods, techniques and games, but a detailed plan means they can deliver a richer and more modern lesson – after all, a teacher usually plans using their full potential.

    Whenever I observe a teacher in their classroom, I try to outline a sketch of their English lesson plan according to what is going on. I am careful to observe any 'magic moments' and deviations from the written plan and note them down separately. Some teachers seize these magic moments; others do not. Some teachers prepare a thorough lesson plan; others are happy with a basic to-do list. There are also teachers who have yet to believe the miracles a lesson plan could produce for them and therefore their sketch does not live up to expectations.

    The 'language chunks' mission

    After each classroom observation, I’ll have a briefing meeting with the English teacher. If the observation takes place in another city and we cannot arrange another face-to-face meeting, we’ll instead go online and discuss. At this point, I’ll elicit more about the teacher’s lesson plan and see to what extent I have been an accurate observer.

    I have found that Language Inspection is the most frequent gap in lesson planning by Iranian teachers. Most of them fully know what type of class they will teach; set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timely) objectives; consider the probable challenges; prepare high-quality material; break the language systems into chunks and artistically engineer the lesson. Yet, they often do not consider how those language chunks will perform within a set class time – and their mission fails.

    The Language Inspection stage asks a teacher to go a bit further with their lesson planning and look at the level of difficulty of various pieces of content in the lesson. Is there enough balance so that students can successfully meet the lesson objectives? If the grammar, vocabulary and skills are all above a student’s ability, then the lesson will be too complex. Language Inspection allows a thoughtful teacher to closely align the objective with the difficulty of the grammar, vocabulary and skill. A bit like a train running along a fixed track, Language Inspection can help make sure that our lessons run smoothly.

    Lesson planning made easy with the GSE Teacher Toolkit

    If a lesson consists of some or many language chunks, those are the vocabulary, grammar and learning objectives we expect to be made into learning outcomes by the end of the class or course. While Language Analysis in a lesson plan reveals the vocabulary, grammar and learning objectives, in Language Inspection each chunk is examined to determine what they really do and how they can be presented and, more importantly, to assess the learning outcomes required.

    can be a teacher’s faithful lesson-planning pal – especially when it comes to Language Inspection. It’s simple to use, yet modern and exciting. It is detailed and it delivers everything you need.

    To use it, all you need is an internet connection on your mobile, tablet, laptop or PC. Launch and you’ll have the ability to delve into the heart of your lesson. You’ll be able to identify any gaps in a lesson – much like the same way you can see the gap between a train and a platforms edge. Mind the gap! You can look into the darkness of this gap and ask yourself: “Does this grammar form belong in this lesson? Do I need to fit in some vocabulary to fill up this blank space? Is it time to move forward in my schedule because my students are mastering this skill early?”

    gives you the ability to assess your lesson to look for these gaps – whether small or big – in your teaching. By doing this you can plan thoughtfully and clearly to support your students. It really is an opportunity to 'mind the gap' in your English lesson planning.