A comparative study of AI-human-made and human-made test forms for a university TESOL theory course
Guardado en:
| Publicado en: | Language Testing in Asia vol. 14, no. 1 (Dec 2024), p. 19 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature B.V.
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Citation/Abstract Full Text - PDF |
| Etiquetas: |
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 3065506961 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 022 | |a 2229-0443 | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s40468-024-00291-3 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a 3065506961 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20241201 |b d20241231 | |
| 084 | |a 243835 |2 nlm | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a O, Kyung-Mi |u Dongduk Women’s University, Seoul, South Korea (GRID:grid.412059.b) (ISNI:0000 0004 0532 5816) | |
| 245 | 1 | |a A comparative study of AI-human-made and human-made test forms for a university TESOL theory course | |
| 260 | |b Springer Nature B.V. |c Dec 2024 | ||
| 513 | |a Journal Article | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a This study examines the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) in creating parallel test items compared to human-made ones. Two test forms were developed: one consisting of 20 existing human-made items and another with 20 new items generated with ChatGPT assistance. Expert reviews confirmed the content parallelism of the two test forms. Forty-three university students then completed the 40 test items presented randomly from both forms on a final test. Statistical analyses of student performance indicated comparability between the AI-human-made and human-made test forms. Despite limitations such as sample size and reliance on classical test theory (CTT), the findings suggest ChatGPT’s potential to assist teachers in test item creation, reducing workload and saving time. These results highlight ChatGPT’s value in educational assessment and emphasize the need for further research and development in this area. | |
| 653 | |a Human-computer interaction | ||
| 653 | |a College students | ||
| 653 | |a Artificial intelligence | ||
| 653 | |a Language | ||
| 653 | |a Students | ||
| 653 | |a Verbal communication | ||
| 653 | |a Quantitative psychology | ||
| 653 | |a Classical test theory | ||
| 653 | |a Cognitive models | ||
| 653 | |a Listening | ||
| 653 | |a Natural language processing | ||
| 653 | |a Automation | ||
| 653 | |a Research & development--R&D | ||
| 653 | |a Feedback | ||
| 653 | |a Learning | ||
| 653 | |a Teachers | ||
| 653 | |a Chatbots | ||
| 653 | |a Cognition & reasoning | ||
| 653 | |a Tests | ||
| 653 | |a Linguistics education | ||
| 653 | |a TESOL | ||
| 653 | |a Comparative studies | ||
| 653 | |a Efficacy | ||
| 653 | |a Humans | ||
| 653 | |a Comparative analysis | ||
| 653 | |a Oral Language | ||
| 653 | |a Test Theory | ||
| 653 | |a Literature Reviews | ||
| 653 | |a Item Banks | ||
| 653 | |a Language Skills | ||
| 653 | |a Test Format | ||
| 653 | |a Computers | ||
| 653 | |a English (Second Language) | ||
| 653 | |a Language Tests | ||
| 653 | |a Test Items | ||
| 653 | |a Teacher Made Tests | ||
| 653 | |a Feedback (Response) | ||
| 653 | |a Psychometrics | ||
| 653 | |a Educational Assessment | ||
| 653 | |a Comparative Education | ||
| 653 | |a Language Processing | ||
| 653 | |a Learner Engagement | ||
| 653 | |a Logical Thinking | ||
| 773 | 0 | |t Language Testing in Asia |g vol. 14, no. 1 (Dec 2024), p. 19 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t Education Database | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3065506961/abstract/embedded/6A8EOT78XXH2IG52?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text - PDF |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3065506961/fulltextPDF/embedded/6A8EOT78XXH2IG52?source=fedsrch |