Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Evaluating LLMs for Automated Scoring in Formative Assessments

Date
Publisher
Applied Sciences
The increasing complexity and scale of modern education have revealed the shortcomings of traditional grading methods in providing consistent and scalable assessments. Advancements in artificial intelligence have positioned Large Language Models (LLMs) as robust solutions for automating grading tasks. This study systematically compared the grading performance of an open-source LLM (LLaMA 3.2) and a premium LLM (OpenAI GPT-4o) against human evaluators across diverse question types in the context of a computer programming subject. Using detailed rubrics, the study assessed the alignment between LLM-generated and human-assigned grades. Results revealed that while both LLMs align closely with human grading, equivalence testing demonstrated that the premium LLM achieves statistically and practically similar grading patterns, particularly for code-based questions, suggesting its potential as a reliable tool for educational assessments. These findings underscore the ability of LLMs to enhance grading consistency, reduce educator workload, and address scalability challenges in programming-focused assessments.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How closely do open-source and commercial language models match human grading in a computer programming course?
  • Setting and data: Computer programming subject, diverse question types; specific sample size and location not stated in the abstract.
  • Method: Equivalence testing comparing model-generated and human-assigned grades using detailed rubrics
Why it matters

The increasing complexity and scale of modern education expose the shortcomings of traditional grading methods in providing consistent and scalable assessments.

Key findings
  • Both large language models aligned closely with human grading across diverse question types.
  • Equivalence testing demonstrated that OpenAI GPT-4o achieved statistically and practically similar grading patterns to human evaluators, particularly for code-based questions.
  • The results suggest that premium models have potential as reliable assessment tools capable of enhancing grading consistency and reducing educator workload.

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?