Using ChatGPT to Score Essays and Short-Form Constructed Responses

Overview

• This study aimed to determine if ChatGPT's large language models could match the scoring accuracy of human and machine scores from the ASAP competition.
• The investigation focused on various prediction models, including linear regression, random forest, gradient boost, and boost.
• ChatGPT's performance was evaluated against human raters using quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) metrics.

Plain English Explanation

The study looked at whether ChatGPT, a powerful language model, could match the scoring accuracy of humans and machines in the ASAP competition. The researchers tested different prediction models, like linear regression and random forest, to see how well ChatGPT could score essays compared to human raters. They used a special metric called quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) to measure the similarity between ChatGPT's scores and the human scores.

The results showed that while ChatGPT's gradient boost model (a type of machine learning model) did well and got QWK scores close to the human raters for some data sets, its overall performance was not consistent and was often lower than the human scores. This means ChatGPT still has room for improvement, especially when it comes to handling biases and ensuring the fairness of the scoring.

Despite these challenges, the study found that ChatGPT has the potential to be used for efficient scoring, especially if it's fine-tuned for specific domains. However, the researchers concluded that ChatGPT would need more development before it could be relied upon for high-stakes assessments. Future research should focus on improving the model's accuracy, addressing ethical considerations, and exploring ways to combine ChatGPT with other methods to get the best results.

Technical Explanation

The study aimed to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT, a large language model, in matching the scoring accuracy of human and machine scores from the Automated Student Assessment Prize (ASAP) competition. The researchers tested various prediction models, including linear regression, random forest, gradient boost, and boost, to assess ChatGPT's capabilities.

To evaluate ChatGPT's performance, the researchers used the quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) metric, which measures the agreement between ChatGPT's scores and the human raters' scores. The results showed that while ChatGPT's gradient boost model achieved QWKs close to human raters for some data sets, its overall performance was inconsistent and often lower than the human scores.

The study highlighted the need for further refinement of ChatGPT's scoring capabilities, particularly in handling biases and ensuring scoring fairness. Despite these challenges, the researchers found that ChatGPT demonstrated potential for scoring efficiency, especially with domain-specific fine-tuning.

Critical Analysis

The study acknowledges the limitations of ChatGPT's current performance and the need for further development to make it a reliable tool for high-stakes assessments. The researchers raise important concerns about the model's inconsistency and potential biases, which must be addressed before ChatGPT can be widely adopted for scoring purposes.

While the study suggests that ChatGPT could complement human scoring, it is essential to consider the ethical implications of relying on an AI system for such critical tasks. The researchers emphasize the importance of addressing these ethical considerations in future research.

Additionally, the study highlights the need for exploring hybrid models that combine ChatGPT with empirical methods to improve the overall accuracy and reliability of the scoring process. This approach could potentially leverage the strengths of both human and machine intelligence to deliver more robust and equitable assessments.

Conclusion

The study's findings suggest that while ChatGPT has the potential to enhance scoring efficiency, it still requires further refinement and development to match the accuracy and consistency of human raters. The researchers recommend continued research to improve the model's performance, address ethical concerns, and explore hybrid approaches that integrate ChatGPT with other empirical methods. By addressing these challenges, the research community can work towards developing AI-powered scoring systems that are reliable, fair, and aligned with the needs of educational and assessment domains.