Date
Publisher
IEEE
The student-generated question (SGQ) strategy is an effective instructional strategy for developing students' higher order cognitive and critical thinking. However, assessing the quality of SGQs is time consuming and domain experts intensive. Previous automatic evaluation work focused on surface-level features of questions. To overcome this limitation, the state-of-the-art language models GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.0 were used to evaluate 1084 SGQs for topic relevance, clarity of expression, answerability, challenging, and cognitive level. Results showed that GPT-4.0 exhibits superior grading consistency with experts compared to GPT-3.5 in terms of topic relevance, clarity of expression, answerability, and difficulty level. GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.0 had low consistency with experts in terms of cognitive level. Over three rounds of testing, GPT-4.0 demonstrated higher stability in autograding when contrasted with GPT-3.5. In addition, to validate the effectiveness of GPT in evaluating SGQs from different domains and subjects, we have done the same experiment on a part of LearningQ dataset. We also discussed the attitudes of teachers and students toward automatic grading by GPT models. The findings underscore the potential of GPT-4.0 to assist teachers in evaluating the quality of SGQs. Nevertheless, the cognitive level assessment of SGQs still needs manual examination by teachers.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can ChatGPT evaluate the quality of student-generated questions as accurately as human experts?
- Setting and data: 1,084 student-generated questions and part of the LearningQ dataset
- Method: Compares AI grading of student questions with human expert evaluations across multiple rounds of testing
Why it matters
Student-generated questions develop higher-order cognitive and critical thinking, but assessing their quality is time-consuming and expert-intensive. Furthermore, previous automatic evaluation work focused only on surface-level features of questions.
Key findings
- Across 1,084 student-generated questions, GPT-4 matched human expert ratings more closely than GPT-3.5 on topic relevance, clarity, answerability, and question difficulty.
- Both AI models showed low agreement with human experts when evaluating the cognitive level of student questions.
- GPT-4 demonstrated greater grading stability across three rounds of automated scoring than GPT-3.5.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
