This is an archive of the original site and you may encounter broken links and/or functionality

Feedback paradigms (Demonstration 0266)


09:00 - 09:50 on Thursday, 9 September 2010 in Room 4


266 Two language technology-based services for providing personalised formative feedback
Gaston Burek, Gillian Armitt, Isobel Braidman, Dale Gerdemann, Bernhard Hoisl, Robert Koblischke, Christoph Mauerhofer, Petya Osenova, Kiril Simov, Alisdair Smithies, Fridolin Wild


266 Two language technology-based services for providing personalised formative feedback
Gaston Burek, Gillian Armitt, Isobel Braidman, Dale Gerdemann, Bernhard Hoisl, Robert Koblischke, Christoph Mauerhofer, Petya Osenova, Kiril Simov, Alisdair Smithies, Fridolin Wild
Learners can benefit from personalised formative feedback while learning but this is often not practical owing to tutors' availability and time constraints. This demonstration provides two scenerios from the EU-funded LTfLL project of use of language technologies to provide feedback on learner texts. Both services implement latent semantic analysis (LSA) (Landauer and Dumais 1997), which uses statistical computations to analyse textual relationships and facilitate comparisons between learner and reference texts. The theoretical framework for both scenarios is Stahl’s model of knowledge building (Stahl 2006), which integrates personal and collaborative ‘knowing’. Scenario 1: WP4.1 is aimed at learners where expected knowledge has boundaries, e.g. in the early stages of a learning journey. Feedback is situated within a positioning service that poses questions to be answered. Learners may know more than they actually articulate, so feedback helps them revise their texts before submission to tutors for positioning. Scenario 2: CONSPECT is aimed at advanced learners with high degrees of autonomy regarding what they learn and when. Learners can find it difficult to determine the required depth and extent of knowledge. CONSPECT compares learner texts with those of peers and reference materials to identify gaps in conceptual coverage. Intended outcomes: greater understanding of the potential and limitations of language technologies for providing formative feedback; insight into possible changes in learning approaches.