Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This research demonstrates improved scoring accuracy in educational assessments, suggesting a path for greater transparency in AES systems.
The Automated Essay Scoring (AES) systems confront two fundamental challenges: opaque “black-box” decision-making that limits educator trust, and insufficient validation across linguistically diverse educational contexts. This study proposes IRT-AESF, an innovative framework that bridges educational measurement theory and artificial intelligence by integrating item response theory (IRT) with deep learning. The framework generates three theoretically grounded psychometric parameters: student ability, item difficulty, and item discrimination, which provide transparent and interpretable explanations for scoring decisions. We rigorously evaluated IRT-AESF through 5-fold cross-validation on three large-scale datasets comprising 41,328 authentic essays from English and Chinese educational settings, including both classroom assessments and high-stakes examinations. Results demonstrate statistically significant improvements over competitive baseline models, achieving an 8.4% relative increase in quadratic weighted kappa while maintaining robust cross-lingual performance. This research advances the development of transparent, trustworthy automated assessment systems that deliver not only scores but meaningful diagnostic insights for educational practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xia et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: