Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2024
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10267 |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866912154967343104 |
|---|---|
| author | Thomas, Danielle R. Borchers, Conrad Kakarla, Sanjit Lin, Jionghao Bhushan, Shambhavi Guo, Boyuan Gatz, Erin Koedinger, Kenneth R. |
| author_facet | Thomas, Danielle R. Borchers, Conrad Kakarla, Sanjit Lin, Jionghao Bhushan, Shambhavi Guo, Boyuan Gatz, Erin Koedinger, Kenneth R. |
| contents | The role of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) as effective learning tools has been debated in past research. While MCQs are widely used due to their ease in grading, open response questions are increasingly used for instruction, given advances in large language models (LLMs) for automated grading. This study evaluates MCQs effectiveness relative to open-response questions, both individually and in combination, on learning. These activities are embedded within six tutor lessons on advocacy. Using a posttest-only randomized control design, we compare the performance of 234 tutors (790 lesson completions) across three conditions: MCQ only, open response only, and a combination of both. We find no significant learning differences across conditions at posttest, but tutors in the MCQ condition took significantly less time to complete instruction. These findings suggest that MCQs are as effective, and more efficient, than open response tasks for learning when practice time is limited. To further enhance efficiency, we autograded open responses using GPT-4o and GPT-4-turbo. GPT models demonstrate proficiency for purposes of low-stakes assessment, though further research is needed for broader use. This study contributes a dataset of lesson log data, human annotation rubrics, and LLM prompts to promote transparency and reproducibility. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2412_10267 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Does Multiple Choice Have a Future in the Age of Generative AI? A Posttest-only RCT Thomas, Danielle R. Borchers, Conrad Kakarla, Sanjit Lin, Jionghao Bhushan, Shambhavi Guo, Boyuan Gatz, Erin Koedinger, Kenneth R. Human-Computer Interaction Artificial Intelligence The role of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) as effective learning tools has been debated in past research. While MCQs are widely used due to their ease in grading, open response questions are increasingly used for instruction, given advances in large language models (LLMs) for automated grading. This study evaluates MCQs effectiveness relative to open-response questions, both individually and in combination, on learning. These activities are embedded within six tutor lessons on advocacy. Using a posttest-only randomized control design, we compare the performance of 234 tutors (790 lesson completions) across three conditions: MCQ only, open response only, and a combination of both. We find no significant learning differences across conditions at posttest, but tutors in the MCQ condition took significantly less time to complete instruction. These findings suggest that MCQs are as effective, and more efficient, than open response tasks for learning when practice time is limited. To further enhance efficiency, we autograded open responses using GPT-4o and GPT-4-turbo. GPT models demonstrate proficiency for purposes of low-stakes assessment, though further research is needed for broader use. This study contributes a dataset of lesson log data, human annotation rubrics, and LLM prompts to promote transparency and reproducibility. |
| title | Does Multiple Choice Have a Future in the Age of Generative AI? A Posttest-only RCT |
| topic | Human-Computer Interaction Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10267 |