{"title":"使用基于英语的自动计算机评分模型和机器翻译对韩语书面回答进行评分:以自然选择概念测试为例","authors":"M. Ha","doi":"10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to test the efficacy of English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation to score Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items. To this end, I collected 128 pre-service biology teachers’ written responses on four-item instrument (total 512 written responses). The machine translation software (i.e., Google Translate) translated both original responses and spell-corrected responses. The presence/absence of five scientific ideas and three naïve ideas in both translated responses were judged by the automated computer scoring models (i.e., EvoGrader). The computer-scored results (4096 predictions) were compared with expert-scored results. The results illustrated that no significant differences in both average scores and statistical results using average scores was found between the computer-scored result and experts-scored result. The Pearson correlation coefficients of composite scores for each student between computer scoring and experts scoring were 0.848 for scientific ideas and 0.776 for naïve ideas. The inter-rater reliability indices (Cohen kappa) between computer scoring and experts scoring for linguistically simple concepts (e.g., variation, competition, and limited resources) were over 0.8. These findings reveal that the English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation can be a promising method in scoring Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items.","PeriodicalId":107400,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scoring Korean Written Responses Using English - Based Automated Computer Scoring Models and Machine Translation: A Case of Natural Selection Concept Test\",\"authors\":\"M. Ha\",\"doi\":\"10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0389\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to test the efficacy of English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation to score Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items. To this end, I collected 128 pre-service biology teachers’ written responses on four-item instrument (total 512 written responses). The machine translation software (i.e., Google Translate) translated both original responses and spell-corrected responses. The presence/absence of five scientific ideas and three naïve ideas in both translated responses were judged by the automated computer scoring models (i.e., EvoGrader). The computer-scored results (4096 predictions) were compared with expert-scored results. The results illustrated that no significant differences in both average scores and statistical results using average scores was found between the computer-scored result and experts-scored result. The Pearson correlation coefficients of composite scores for each student between computer scoring and experts scoring were 0.848 for scientific ideas and 0.776 for naïve ideas. The inter-rater reliability indices (Cohen kappa) between computer scoring and experts scoring for linguistically simple concepts (e.g., variation, competition, and limited resources) were over 0.8. These findings reveal that the English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation can be a promising method in scoring Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items.\",\"PeriodicalId\":107400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0389\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0389","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Scoring Korean Written Responses Using English - Based Automated Computer Scoring Models and Machine Translation: A Case of Natural Selection Concept Test
This study aims to test the efficacy of English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation to score Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items. To this end, I collected 128 pre-service biology teachers’ written responses on four-item instrument (total 512 written responses). The machine translation software (i.e., Google Translate) translated both original responses and spell-corrected responses. The presence/absence of five scientific ideas and three naïve ideas in both translated responses were judged by the automated computer scoring models (i.e., EvoGrader). The computer-scored results (4096 predictions) were compared with expert-scored results. The results illustrated that no significant differences in both average scores and statistical results using average scores was found between the computer-scored result and experts-scored result. The Pearson correlation coefficients of composite scores for each student between computer scoring and experts scoring were 0.848 for scientific ideas and 0.776 for naïve ideas. The inter-rater reliability indices (Cohen kappa) between computer scoring and experts scoring for linguistically simple concepts (e.g., variation, competition, and limited resources) were over 0.8. These findings reveal that the English-based automated computer scoring models and machine translation can be a promising method in scoring Korean college students’ written responses on natural selection concept items.