Loading…

Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments

Automated summary evaluation is proposed as an alternative to rubrics and multiple-choice tests in knowledge assessment. Inbuilt rubric is a recent Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) method that implements rubrics in an artificially-generated semantic space. It was compared with classical LSA's cos...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Assessment and evaluation in higher education 2019-10, Vol.44 (7), p.1029-1041
Main Authors: Martínez-Huertas, José Á., Jastrzebska, Olga, Olmos, Ricardo, León, José A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3
container_end_page 1041
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1029
container_title Assessment and evaluation in higher education
container_volume 44
creator Martínez-Huertas, José Á.
Jastrzebska, Olga
Olmos, Ricardo
León, José A.
description Automated summary evaluation is proposed as an alternative to rubrics and multiple-choice tests in knowledge assessment. Inbuilt rubric is a recent Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) method that implements rubrics in an artificially-generated semantic space. It was compared with classical LSA's cosine-based methods assessing knowledge in a within-subjects design regarding two validation sources: a comparison with the results of rubric scores and multiple-choice tests, and the sensitivity of predicting the academic level of the test-taker. Results showed a higher reliability for inbuilt rubric (from Pearson correlation coefficient .81 to .49) over the classical LSA method (from .61 to .34), and a higher sensitivity using binary logistic regressions and effect sizes to predict academic level. It is concluded that inbuilt rubric has a qualitatively higher reliability and validity than classical LSA methods in a way that is complementary to models based on semantic networks. Thus, it is concluded that new automated summary evaluation approaches such as the inbuilt rubric method can be practical in terms of reliability and efficiency, and, thus, they can offer an affordable and valuable form of knowledge assessment in different educational levels.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/02602938.2019.1570079
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2210472589</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1213019</ericid><sourcerecordid>2210472589</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtqGzEUhkVpoa7bRzAIsh5X0tysrmpCkjYYukkgO6HRHGEZjeTokuAX6HNHg90usxLi__4jnQ-hFSVrSjbkO2EdYbzerBmhfE3bnpCef0AL2nS8Yrx_-ogWM1PN0Gf0JcYDIaSpabtAf7c5-UkmGHHM0yTDCcOLtFkm4x1-NWmPjRuysQmHPASj8ARp78cfeOuwtAmCK-gL4OSx8i6mkNU8LEA8litELN2Ip2yTOVqo1N4bVWCIqSSx5HECl-JX9ElLG-Hb5Vyix9ubh-tf1e7P3e_r7a5SdUdSBUyzVnW6azs9yFYyNvJBNxs1NGW_ERTh_aCBcN0wpoF3o66Li6HltJESoF6iq_PcY_DPufxCHHwuK9goGKOk6Vm74YVqz5QKPsYAWhyDmd0ISsSsXPxTLmbl4qK89FbnHhRR_zs395TRunAl_3nOjdM-TPLVBzuKJE_WBx2kUyaK-v0n3gBNG5YO</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2210472589</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>Martínez-Huertas, José Á. ; Jastrzebska, Olga ; Olmos, Ricardo ; León, José A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Martínez-Huertas, José Á. ; Jastrzebska, Olga ; Olmos, Ricardo ; León, José A.</creatorcontrib><description>Automated summary evaluation is proposed as an alternative to rubrics and multiple-choice tests in knowledge assessment. Inbuilt rubric is a recent Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) method that implements rubrics in an artificially-generated semantic space. It was compared with classical LSA's cosine-based methods assessing knowledge in a within-subjects design regarding two validation sources: a comparison with the results of rubric scores and multiple-choice tests, and the sensitivity of predicting the academic level of the test-taker. Results showed a higher reliability for inbuilt rubric (from Pearson correlation coefficient .81 to .49) over the classical LSA method (from .61 to .34), and a higher sensitivity using binary logistic regressions and effect sizes to predict academic level. It is concluded that inbuilt rubric has a qualitatively higher reliability and validity than classical LSA methods in a way that is complementary to models based on semantic networks. Thus, it is concluded that new automated summary evaluation approaches such as the inbuilt rubric method can be practical in terms of reliability and efficiency, and, thus, they can offer an affordable and valuable form of knowledge assessment in different educational levels.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0260-2938</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-297X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2019.1570079</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Alternative Assessment ; automated summary evalution ; Automation ; Correlation ; Educational attainment ; Educational tests &amp; measurements ; Effect Size ; Foreign Countries ; High School Students ; inbuilt rubric ; Measurement Techniques ; Multiple Choice Tests ; Reading Comprehension ; Reading Tests ; rubrics ; Scoring Rubrics ; Semantic analysis ; Semantics ; Semiotics ; Student Evaluation ; summaries ; Test Reliability ; Test Validity ; Undergraduate Students</subject><ispartof>Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 2019-10, Vol.44 (7), p.1029-1041</ispartof><rights>2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group 2019</rights><rights>2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1213019$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Martínez-Huertas, José Á.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jastrzebska, Olga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olmos, Ricardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>León, José A.</creatorcontrib><title>Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments</title><title>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</title><description>Automated summary evaluation is proposed as an alternative to rubrics and multiple-choice tests in knowledge assessment. Inbuilt rubric is a recent Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) method that implements rubrics in an artificially-generated semantic space. It was compared with classical LSA's cosine-based methods assessing knowledge in a within-subjects design regarding two validation sources: a comparison with the results of rubric scores and multiple-choice tests, and the sensitivity of predicting the academic level of the test-taker. Results showed a higher reliability for inbuilt rubric (from Pearson correlation coefficient .81 to .49) over the classical LSA method (from .61 to .34), and a higher sensitivity using binary logistic regressions and effect sizes to predict academic level. It is concluded that inbuilt rubric has a qualitatively higher reliability and validity than classical LSA methods in a way that is complementary to models based on semantic networks. Thus, it is concluded that new automated summary evaluation approaches such as the inbuilt rubric method can be practical in terms of reliability and efficiency, and, thus, they can offer an affordable and valuable form of knowledge assessment in different educational levels.</description><subject>Alternative Assessment</subject><subject>automated summary evalution</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Educational attainment</subject><subject>Educational tests &amp; measurements</subject><subject>Effect Size</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>High School Students</subject><subject>inbuilt rubric</subject><subject>Measurement Techniques</subject><subject>Multiple Choice Tests</subject><subject>Reading Comprehension</subject><subject>Reading Tests</subject><subject>rubrics</subject><subject>Scoring Rubrics</subject><subject>Semantic analysis</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Semiotics</subject><subject>Student Evaluation</subject><subject>summaries</subject><subject>Test Reliability</subject><subject>Test Validity</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><issn>0260-2938</issn><issn>1469-297X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtqGzEUhkVpoa7bRzAIsh5X0tysrmpCkjYYukkgO6HRHGEZjeTokuAX6HNHg90usxLi__4jnQ-hFSVrSjbkO2EdYbzerBmhfE3bnpCef0AL2nS8Yrx_-ogWM1PN0Gf0JcYDIaSpabtAf7c5-UkmGHHM0yTDCcOLtFkm4x1-NWmPjRuysQmHPASj8ARp78cfeOuwtAmCK-gL4OSx8i6mkNU8LEA8litELN2Ip2yTOVqo1N4bVWCIqSSx5HECl-JX9ElLG-Hb5Vyix9ubh-tf1e7P3e_r7a5SdUdSBUyzVnW6azs9yFYyNvJBNxs1NGW_ERTh_aCBcN0wpoF3o66Li6HltJESoF6iq_PcY_DPufxCHHwuK9goGKOk6Vm74YVqz5QKPsYAWhyDmd0ISsSsXPxTLmbl4qK89FbnHhRR_zs395TRunAl_3nOjdM-TPLVBzuKJE_WBx2kUyaK-v0n3gBNG5YO</recordid><startdate>20191003</startdate><enddate>20191003</enddate><creator>Martínez-Huertas, José Á.</creator><creator>Jastrzebska, Olga</creator><creator>Olmos, Ricardo</creator><creator>León, José A.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191003</creationdate><title>Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments</title><author>Martínez-Huertas, José Á. ; Jastrzebska, Olga ; Olmos, Ricardo ; León, José A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Alternative Assessment</topic><topic>automated summary evalution</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Educational attainment</topic><topic>Educational tests &amp; measurements</topic><topic>Effect Size</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>High School Students</topic><topic>inbuilt rubric</topic><topic>Measurement Techniques</topic><topic>Multiple Choice Tests</topic><topic>Reading Comprehension</topic><topic>Reading Tests</topic><topic>rubrics</topic><topic>Scoring Rubrics</topic><topic>Semantic analysis</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Semiotics</topic><topic>Student Evaluation</topic><topic>summaries</topic><topic>Test Reliability</topic><topic>Test Validity</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Martínez-Huertas, José Á.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jastrzebska, Olga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olmos, Ricardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>León, José A.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Martínez-Huertas, José Á.</au><au>Jastrzebska, Olga</au><au>Olmos, Ricardo</au><au>León, José A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1213019</ericid><atitle>Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments</atitle><jtitle>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</jtitle><date>2019-10-03</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1029</spage><epage>1041</epage><pages>1029-1041</pages><issn>0260-2938</issn><eissn>1469-297X</eissn><abstract>Automated summary evaluation is proposed as an alternative to rubrics and multiple-choice tests in knowledge assessment. Inbuilt rubric is a recent Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) method that implements rubrics in an artificially-generated semantic space. It was compared with classical LSA's cosine-based methods assessing knowledge in a within-subjects design regarding two validation sources: a comparison with the results of rubric scores and multiple-choice tests, and the sensitivity of predicting the academic level of the test-taker. Results showed a higher reliability for inbuilt rubric (from Pearson correlation coefficient .81 to .49) over the classical LSA method (from .61 to .34), and a higher sensitivity using binary logistic regressions and effect sizes to predict academic level. It is concluded that inbuilt rubric has a qualitatively higher reliability and validity than classical LSA methods in a way that is complementary to models based on semantic networks. Thus, it is concluded that new automated summary evaluation approaches such as the inbuilt rubric method can be practical in terms of reliability and efficiency, and, thus, they can offer an affordable and valuable form of knowledge assessment in different educational levels.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/02602938.2019.1570079</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0260-2938
ispartof Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 2019-10, Vol.44 (7), p.1029-1041
issn 0260-2938
1469-297X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2210472589
source Taylor & Francis; ERIC
subjects Alternative Assessment
automated summary evalution
Automation
Correlation
Educational attainment
Educational tests & measurements
Effect Size
Foreign Countries
High School Students
inbuilt rubric
Measurement Techniques
Multiple Choice Tests
Reading Comprehension
Reading Tests
rubrics
Scoring Rubrics
Semantic analysis
Semantics
Semiotics
Student Evaluation
summaries
Test Reliability
Test Validity
Undergraduate Students
title Automated summary evaluation with inbuilt rubric method: An alternative to constructed responses and multiple-choice tests assessments
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T20%3A01%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Automated%20summary%20evaluation%20with%20inbuilt%20rubric%20method:%20An%20alternative%20to%20constructed%20responses%20and%20multiple-choice%20tests%20assessments&rft.jtitle=Assessment%20and%20evaluation%20in%20higher%20education&rft.au=Mart%C3%ADnez-Huertas,%20Jos%C3%A9%20%C3%81.&rft.date=2019-10-03&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1029&rft.epage=1041&rft.pages=1029-1041&rft.issn=0260-2938&rft.eissn=1469-297X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/02602938.2019.1570079&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2210472589%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-e2f25c6f656fba5a22d9bf48cb4260dec097bfe09f422fe96df3079b5914aaee3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2210472589&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1213019&rfr_iscdi=true