Can Large Language Models Make the Grade? An Empirical Study Evaluating LLMs Ability to Mark Short Answer Questions in K-12 Education

AI-generated keywords: Empirical Study Large Language Models Grading K-12 Education GPT-4

AI-generated Key Points

  • Researchers evaluated the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in grading open text responses to short answer questions in K-12 education.
  • The study focused on different combinations of GPT versions and prompt engineering strategies for marking real student answers in Science and History subjects across grade levels 5-16.
  • Using a new dataset from Carousel, researchers found that GPT-4 with basic few-shot prompting achieved high performance (Kappa, 0.70), approaching human-level grading (0.75).
  • Results suggest that LLMs could be valuable tools for supporting low-stakes formative assessment tasks in K-12 education, enhancing real-world education delivery.
  • This research demonstrates the potential of LLMs in automating the grading process with high accuracy, opening up new possibilities for more efficient and effective educational assessment practices.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Owen Henkel, Adam Boxer, Libby Hills, Bill Roberts

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: This paper presents reports on a series of experiments with a novel dataset evaluating how well Large Language Models (LLMs) can mark (i.e. grade) open text responses to short answer questions, Specifically, we explore how well different combinations of GPT version and prompt engineering strategies performed at marking real student answers to short answer across different domain areas (Science and History) and grade-levels (spanning ages 5-16) using a new, never-used-before dataset from Carousel, a quizzing platform. We found that GPT-4, with basic few-shot prompting performed well (Kappa, 0.70) and, importantly, very close to human-level performance (0.75). This research builds on prior findings that GPT-4 could reliably score short answer reading comprehension questions at a performance-level very close to that of expert human raters. The proximity to human-level performance, across a variety of subjects and grade levels suggests that LLMs could be a valuable tool for supporting low-stakes formative assessment tasks in K-12 education and has important implications for real-world education delivery.

Submitted to arXiv on 05 May. 2024

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2405.02985v1

In this empirical study, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in grading open text responses to short answer questions in K-12 education. The study focused on assessing different combinations of GPT versions and prompt engineering strategies in marking real student answers across various subject areas (Science and History) and grade levels (ages 5-16). Using a new dataset from Carousel, a quizzing platform, the researchers found that GPT-4 with basic few-shot prompting achieved a high level of performance (Kappa, 0.70), closely approaching human-level grading (0.75). This research builds upon previous findings that GPT-4 can reliably score short answer reading comprehension questions at a level comparable to expert human raters. The results suggest that LLMs could serve as valuable tools for supporting low-stakes formative assessment tasks in K-12 education, offering important implications for enhancing real-world education delivery. Assessment and feedback are critical components of the learning process, with formative assessments playing a key role in improving learning outcomes. However, scaling formative assessment practices has traditionally been challenging due to costs and logistical demands. By demonstrating the potential of LLMs in automating the grading process with high accuracy, this study opens up new possibilities for more efficient and effective educational assessment practices.
Created on 30 Aug. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.