-
Holistic Quality
-
Genre Elements
-
Correct Word Sequence
-
Readability
-
Complex Words
While categories 1-3 were accurately scored by human raters, categories 4-5 used computational methods that introduced significant inaccuracies. Readability calculations using the Flesch-Kincaid formula and complex word percentages produced unreliable results for short text samples.
Our research aimed to identify and integrate alternative metrics to assess the readability and sophistication of a writing sample. We also researched options for scoring scales that would allow students to see more growth on their assessment reports.
-
Lexical Profile: Vocabulary usage, variety, and accuracy
-
Sentence Variety and Accuracy: The ability to construct clear, varied sentence structures
Additionally, metrics must be:
- Easy and quick to determine using rubrics or computational methods
- Less susceptible to innacuracies due to short text length
= MTLD + AVG(AWL, EVP)
Measure of Textual Lexical Diversity (MTLD)
- Typically ranges from 0-100, where lower numbers indicate less lexical diversity
-
Evaluates texts sequentially, measures average words read before type-token ratio falls below 0.72
- Less sensitive to text length because it maintains consistent factor size
-
Retrieved using Text Inspector
-
Rounded to nearest whole number
-
Translated to 0-9 scale using a piecewise function
Academic Word List (AWL) & English Vocabulary Profile (EVP)
- Percentage of words from Averil Coxhead's academic word families
- Retrieved using Text Inspector
- Rounded to nearest tenth
- Typical range: 0-10%
- Translated to 0-9 scale using a piecewise function
EVP Characteristics
-
Percentage of unique words at B1 CEFR level
-
Uses UK vocabulary list
-
Retrieved using Text Inspector
-
Rounded to nearest tenth
-
Typical range: 0-20%
- Translated to 0-9 scale using a piecewise function
-
Clarity of sentence structures
-
Variety of clause arrangements
-
Effectiveness of sentence structures in conveying meaning
- Sentence complexity and intentional communication
Scoring Scale:
-
Version 1: Categories scored 0-4, totaling 20 possible points
-
Version 2: Categories scored 0-18, totaling 90 possible points
Contextualization:
-
Version 1: Scores directly compared to CEFR
-
Version 2: Replaced direct CEFR correlation with standardized cateogires specific to the platform's curriculum
Subscores:
-
Version 1: Feedback based on total score
- Version 2: Three subscores displayed numerically, allowing performance-based customization