Date
Publisher
arXiv
This study highlights the potential of fine-tuned ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) for
automatically scoring student written constructed responses using example
assessment tasks in science education. Recent studies on OpenAI's generative
model GPT-3.5 proved its superiority in predicting the natural language with
high accuracy and human-like responses. GPT-3.5 has been trained over enormous
online language materials such as journals and Wikipedia; therefore, more than
direct usage of pre-trained GPT-3.5 is required for automatic scoring as
students utilize a different language than trained material. These imply that a
domain-specific model, fine-tuned over data for specific tasks, can enhance
model performance. In this study, we fine-tuned GPT-3.5 on six assessment tasks
with a diverse dataset of middle-school and high-school student responses and
expert scoring. The six tasks comprise two multi-label and four multi-class
assessment tasks. We compare the performance of fine-tuned GPT-3.5 with the
fine-tuned state-of-the-art Google's generated language model, BERT. The
results show that in-domain training corpora constructed from science questions
and responses for BERT achieved average accuracy = 0.838, SD = 0.069. GPT-3.5
shows a remarkable average increase (9.1%) in automatic scoring accuracy (mean
= 9.15, SD = 0.042) for the six tasks, p =0.001 < 0.05. Specifically, for
multi-label tasks (item 1 with 5 labels; item 2 with 10 labels), GPT-3.5
achieved significantly higher scoring accuracy than BERT across all the labels,
with the second item achieving a 7.1% increase. The average scoring increase
for the four multi-class items for GPT-3.5 was 10.6% compared to BERT. Our
study confirmed the effectiveness of fine-tuned GPT-3.5 for automatic scoring
of student responses on domain-specific data in education with high accuracy.
We have released fine-tuned models for public use and community engagement.
Study at a glance
- Question: Can ChatGPT be adapted to accurately score middle and high school students' written science answers?
- Setting and data: Middle-school and high-school student responses and expert scoring across six science assessment tasks.
- Method: Compares how accurately two AI models score student responses against expert human grading.
Why it matters
Direct usage of pre-trained GPT-3.5 is not enough for automatic scoring because students use different language than online training materials. Fine-tuning on domain-specific data for specific assessment tasks can enhance model performance on student responses.
Key findings
- In middle- and high-school science assessments, ChatGPT trained on student work scored written responses with 9.1% higher average accuracy than a leading comparison model.
- For questions scored across multiple rating categories, ChatGPT achieved an average 10.6% increase in grading accuracy compared to the alternative AI model.
- On tasks evaluated against multiple criteria simultaneously, ChatGPT achieved significantly higher accuracy across all categories, including a 7.1% gain on a complex task.
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
