A Latent Dirichlet Allocation approach to understanding students' perceptions of Automated Writing Evaluation

被引:2
作者
Wilson, Joshua [1 ]
Zhang, Saimou [1 ]
Palermo, Corey [2 ]
Cordero, Tania Cruz [1 ]
Zhang, Fan [1 ]
Myers, Matthew C. [1 ]
Potter, Andrew [3 ]
Eacker, Halley [2 ]
Coles, Jessica [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Delaware, Sch Educ, 213E Willard Hall Educ Bldg, Newark, DE 19716 USA
[2] Measurement Inc, Durham, NC USA
[3] Arizona State Univ, Tempe, AZ USA
来源
COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION OPEN | 2024年 / 6卷
基金
比尔及梅琳达.盖茨基金会;
关键词
Automated Writing Evaluation; Automated feedback; Feedback; Latent Dirichlet Allocation; LDA; Perceptions; FEEDBACK;
D O I
10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100194
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Automated writing evaluation (AWE) has shown promise in enhancing students' writing outcomes. However, further research is needed to understand how AWE is perceived by middle school students in the United States, as they have received less attention in this field. This study investigated U.S. middle school students' perceptions of the MI Write AWE system. Students reported their perceptions of MI Write's usefulness using Likert-scale items and an open-ended survey question. We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to identify latent topics in students' comments, followed by qualitative analysis to interpret the themes related to those topics. We then examined whether these themes differed among students who agreed or disagreed that MI Write was a useful learning tool. The LDA analysis revealed four latent topics: (1) students desire more in-depth feedback, (2) students desire an enhanced user experience, (3) students value MI Write as a learning tool but desire greater personalization, and (4) students desire increased fairness in automated scoring. The distribution of these topics varied based on students' ratings of MI Write's usefulness, with Topic 1 more prevalent among students who generally did not find MI Write useful and Topic 3 more prominent among those who found MI Write useful. Our findings contribute to the enhancement and implementation of AWE systems, guide future AWE technology development, and highlight the efficacy of LDA in uncovering latent topics and patterns within textual data to explore students' perspectives of AWE.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2012, The nation's report card: Science 2011
  • [2] In the face of fallible AWE feedback: how do students respond?
    Bai, Lifang
    Hu, Guangwei
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 37 (01) : 67 - 81
  • [3] Blei D.M., 2006, P 23 INT C MACHINE L, P113
  • [4] Probabilistic Topic Models
    Blei, David M.
    [J]. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 2012, 55 (04) : 77 - 84
  • [5] Chang J., 2009, ADV NEURAL INFORM PR, V44, P288
  • [6] Chen CFE, 2008, LANG LEARN TECHNOL, V12, P94
  • [7] Examining Human and Automated Ratings of Elementary Students' Writing Quality: A Multivariate Generalizability Theory Application
    Chen, Dandan
    Hebert, Michael
    Wilson, Joshua
    [J]. AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL, 2022, 59 (06) : 1122 - 1156
  • [8] Writing motivation and ability profiles and transition during a technology-based writing intervention
    Cordero, Tania Cruz
    Wilson, Joshua
    Myers, Matthew C.
    Palermo, Corey
    Eacker, Halley
    Potter, Andrew
    Coles, Jessica
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2023, 14
  • [9] Building a validity argument for an automated writing evaluation system (eRevise) as a formative assessment
    Correnti, Richard
    Matsumura, Lindsay Clare
    Wang, Elaine Lin
    Litman, Diane
    Zhang, Haoran
    [J]. COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION OPEN, 2022, 3
  • [10] The persuasive essays for rating, selecting, and understanding argumentative and discourse elements (PERSUADE) corpus 1.0
    Crossley, Scott A.
    Baffour, Perpetual
    Tian, Yu
    Picou, Aigner
    Benner, Meg
    Boser, Ulrich
    [J]. ASSESSING WRITING, 2022, 54