An empirical investigation of neural methods for content scoring of science explanations

Brian Riordan, S. Bichler, Alison Bradford, J. K. Chen, Korah J. Wiley, Libby F. Gerard, M. Linn
{"title":"An empirical investigation of neural methods for content scoring of science explanations","authors":"Brian Riordan, S. Bichler, Alison Bradford, J. K. Chen, Korah J. Wiley, Libby F. Gerard, M. Linn","doi":"10.18653/v1/2020.bea-1.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the widespread adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), science teachers and online learning environments face the challenge of evaluating students’ integration of different dimensions of science learning. Recent advances in representation learning in natural language processing have proven effective across many natural language processing tasks, but a rigorous evaluation of the relative merits of these methods for scoring complex constructed response formative assessments has not previously been carried out. We present a detailed empirical investigation of feature-based, recurrent neural network, and pre-trained transformer models on scoring content in real-world formative assessment data. We demonstrate that recent neural methods can rival or exceed the performance of feature-based methods. We also provide evidence that different classes of neural models take advantage of different learning cues, and pre-trained transformer models may be more robust to spurious, dataset-specific learning cues, better reflecting scoring rubrics.","PeriodicalId":363390,"journal":{"name":"Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.bea-1.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

With the widespread adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), science teachers and online learning environments face the challenge of evaluating students’ integration of different dimensions of science learning. Recent advances in representation learning in natural language processing have proven effective across many natural language processing tasks, but a rigorous evaluation of the relative merits of these methods for scoring complex constructed response formative assessments has not previously been carried out. We present a detailed empirical investigation of feature-based, recurrent neural network, and pre-trained transformer models on scoring content in real-world formative assessment data. We demonstrate that recent neural methods can rival or exceed the performance of feature-based methods. We also provide evidence that different classes of neural models take advantage of different learning cues, and pre-trained transformer models may be more robust to spurious, dataset-specific learning cues, better reflecting scoring rubrics.
科学解释内容评分的神经方法实证研究
随着下一代科学标准(NGSS)的广泛采用,科学教师和在线学习环境面临着评估学生对科学学习不同维度整合的挑战。自然语言处理中表征学习的最新进展已被证明在许多自然语言处理任务中是有效的,但对这些方法在复杂构建反应形成性评估中评分的相对优点的严格评估之前尚未进行过。我们对基于特征、循环神经网络和预训练的变压器模型在真实世界形成性评估数据中的评分内容进行了详细的实证研究。我们证明了最近的神经方法可以媲美或超过基于特征的方法的性能。我们还提供证据表明,不同类别的神经模型利用不同的学习线索,预训练的变形模型可能对虚假的、特定于数据集的学习线索更具鲁棒性,更好地反映评分规则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信