MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English
Automated essay scoring programs are becoming more common and more technically advanced. They provoke strong reactions from both their advocates and their detractors. Arguments tend to fall into two categories: technical and principled. This paper argues that since technical difficulties will be ove...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Routledge
2014
|
| Subjects: |
| _version_ | 1797112335966404608 |
|---|---|
| author | Elliott, V |
| author_facet | Elliott, V |
| author_sort | Elliott, V |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Automated essay scoring programs are becoming more common and more technically advanced. They provoke strong reactions from both their advocates and their detractors. Arguments tend to fall into two categories: technical and principled. This paper argues that since technical difficulties will be overcome with time, the debate ought to be held in terms of the principles. A thought experiment, based on a technically perfect Automated Essay Scorer, is proposed in order to explore the moral questions related to this topic, such as whether students deserve to have their work read by a human. It concludes that affect is an important component both of writing and of the debate, but that if the move to automated scoring stops being an ‘all or nothing’ debate, then many of the objections on principle will be obviated. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T08:22:45Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:212cc79c-3f32-4c3a-8536-85af7459cde7 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T08:22:45Z |
| publishDate | 2014 |
| publisher | Routledge |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:212cc79c-3f32-4c3a-8536-85af7459cde72024-02-09T10:25:01ZMARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of EnglishJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:212cc79c-3f32-4c3a-8536-85af7459cde7EducationEnglishORA DepositRoutledge2014Elliott, VAutomated essay scoring programs are becoming more common and more technically advanced. They provoke strong reactions from both their advocates and their detractors. Arguments tend to fall into two categories: technical and principled. This paper argues that since technical difficulties will be overcome with time, the debate ought to be held in terms of the principles. A thought experiment, based on a technically perfect Automated Essay Scorer, is proposed in order to explore the moral questions related to this topic, such as whether students deserve to have their work read by a human. It concludes that affect is an important component both of writing and of the debate, but that if the move to automated scoring stops being an ‘all or nothing’ debate, then many of the objections on principle will be obviated. |
| spellingShingle | Education Elliott, V MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title | MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title_full | MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title_fullStr | MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title_full_unstemmed | MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title_short | MARC: A thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of English |
| title_sort | marc a thought experiment in the morality of automated marking of english |
| topic | Education |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT elliottv marcathoughtexperimentinthemoralityofautomatedmarkingofenglish |