A Latent Dirichlet Allocation approach to understanding students’ perceptions of Automated Writing Evaluation

IF 4.1 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Computers and Education Open Pub Date : 2024-05-21 DOI:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100194
Joshua Wilson , Saimou Zhang , Corey Palermo , Tania Cruz Cordero , Fan Zhang , Matthew C. Myers , Andrew Potter , Halley Eacker , Jessica Coles
{"title":"A Latent Dirichlet Allocation approach to understanding students’ perceptions of Automated Writing Evaluation","authors":"Joshua Wilson ,&nbsp;Saimou Zhang ,&nbsp;Corey Palermo ,&nbsp;Tania Cruz Cordero ,&nbsp;Fan Zhang ,&nbsp;Matthew C. Myers ,&nbsp;Andrew Potter ,&nbsp;Halley Eacker ,&nbsp;Jessica Coles","doi":"10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Automated writing evaluation (AWE) has shown promise in enhancing students’ writing outcomes. However, further research is needed to understand how AWE is perceived by middle school students in the United States, as they have received less attention in this field. This study investigated U.S. middle school students’ perceptions of the <em>MI Write</em> AWE system. Students reported their perceptions of MI Write's usefulness using Likert-scale items and an open-ended survey question. We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to identify latent topics in students’ comments, followed by qualitative analysis to interpret the themes related to those topics. We then examined whether these themes differed among students who agreed or disagreed that MI Write was a useful learning tool. The LDA analysis revealed four latent topics: (1) students desire more in-depth feedback, (2) students desire an enhanced user experience, (3) students value MI Write as a learning tool but desire greater personalization, and (4) students desire increased fairness in automated scoring. The distribution of these topics varied based on students’ ratings of MI Write's usefulness, with Topic 1 more prevalent among students who generally did not find MI Write useful and Topic 3 more prominent among those who found MI Write useful. Our findings contribute to the enhancement and implementation of AWE systems, guide future AWE technology development, and highlight the efficacy of LDA in uncovering latent topics and patterns within textual data to explore students’ perspectives of AWE.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100322,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Open","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100194"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266655732400034X/pdfft?md5=59757519cdab584f256a934357fa2a53&pid=1-s2.0-S266655732400034X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers and Education Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266655732400034X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Automated writing evaluation (AWE) has shown promise in enhancing students’ writing outcomes. However, further research is needed to understand how AWE is perceived by middle school students in the United States, as they have received less attention in this field. This study investigated U.S. middle school students’ perceptions of the MI Write AWE system. Students reported their perceptions of MI Write's usefulness using Likert-scale items and an open-ended survey question. We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to identify latent topics in students’ comments, followed by qualitative analysis to interpret the themes related to those topics. We then examined whether these themes differed among students who agreed or disagreed that MI Write was a useful learning tool. The LDA analysis revealed four latent topics: (1) students desire more in-depth feedback, (2) students desire an enhanced user experience, (3) students value MI Write as a learning tool but desire greater personalization, and (4) students desire increased fairness in automated scoring. The distribution of these topics varied based on students’ ratings of MI Write's usefulness, with Topic 1 more prevalent among students who generally did not find MI Write useful and Topic 3 more prominent among those who found MI Write useful. Our findings contribute to the enhancement and implementation of AWE systems, guide future AWE technology development, and highlight the efficacy of LDA in uncovering latent topics and patterns within textual data to explore students’ perspectives of AWE.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用潜在 Dirichlet 分配法了解学生对自动写作评价的看法
自动写作评价(AWE)在提高学生写作成果方面已显示出良好的前景。然而,由于美国中学生在这一领域受到的关注较少,因此还需要进一步的研究来了解美国中学生对 AWE 的看法。本研究调查了美国中学生对 MI Write AWE 系统的看法。学生们使用李克特量表项目和开放式调查问题来报告他们对 MI Write 实用性的看法。我们使用潜在德里希勒分配法(LDA)来识别学生评论中的潜在主题,然后通过定性分析来解释与这些主题相关的主题。然后,我们研究了这些主题在同意或不同意 MI Write 是一种有用的学习工具的学生中是否存在差异。LDA 分析揭示了四个潜在主题:(1) 学生希望获得更深入的反馈;(2) 学生希望获得更好的用户体验;(3) 学生重视 MI Write 作为学习工具的价值,但希望获得更多个性化;(4) 学生希望提高自动评分的公平性。根据学生对MI Write有用性的评价,这些主题的分布情况有所不同,主题1在一般认为MI Write没用的学生中更普遍,而主题3在认为MI Write有用的学生中更突出。我们的研究结果有助于加强和实施AWE系统,指导未来的AWE技术开发,并强调了LDA在发现文本数据中的潜在主题和模式以探索学生对AWE的看法方面的功效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Does technology-based non-interactive teaching enhance students’ learning in the classroom? Does testing environment matter for virtual school students? What influences teachers’ implementation of ICT in early childhood education? A qualitative exploration based on an ecological-TPACK framework Middle school teachers’ implementation and perceptions of automated writing evaluation University student and instructor experiences with HyFlex learning: A scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1