Abstract
Diagrammatic models of argument have grown in prominence in recent years. While they have been applied in a number of tutoring contexts, it has not yet been shown that student-produced diagrams can be used to effectively grade students or predict their future performance. We show that manually-assigned diagram grades and automatic structural features of argument diagrams can be used to predict students’ future essay grades, thus supporting the use of argument diagrams for instruction. We also show that the automatic features are competitive with expert human grading despite the fact that semantic content was ignored in automatic processing.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chryssafidou, E., Sharples, M.: Computer-supported planning of essay argument structure. In: Proc. of the 5th International Conference of Argumentation (2002)
Harrell, M., Wetzel, D.: Improving first-year writing using argument diagramming. In: Knauff, M., Sebanz, N., Pauen, M., Wachsmuth, I. (eds.) Proc. of the 35th Annual Conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 2488–2493
Loll, F., Pinkwart, N.: Lasad: Flexible representations for computer-based collaborative argumentation. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 71(1), 91–109 (2013)
Lynch, C.F.: The Diagnosticity of Argument Diagrams Univ. of Pittsburgh (2014)
Lynch, C.F., Ashley, K.D., Falakmassir, M.H.: Comparing argument diagrams. In: Schäfer, B. (ed.) JURIX 2012: The 25th Annual Conference, vol. 250, pp. 81–90. IOS Press, University of Amsterdam (2012)
Lynch, C.F., Ashley, K.D., Pinkwart, N., Aleven, V.: Argument graph classification with genetic programming and c4.5. In: de Baker, R.S.J., Barnes, T., Beck, J.E. (eds.) EDM, pp. 137–146 (2008), www.educationaldatamining.org
Pinkwart, N., Ashley, K.D., Lynch, C.F., Aleven, V.: Evaluating an intelligent tutoring system for making legal arguments with hypotheticals. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 19(4), 401–424 (2009)
Scheuer, O., Niebuhr, S., Dragon, T., McLaren, B.M., Pinkwart, N.: Adaptive support for graphical argumentation - the LASAD approach. IEEE Learning Technology Newsletter 14(1), 8–11 (2012)
Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B.: Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 5, 43–102 (2010)
Shum, S.J.B., MacLean, A., Bellotti, V.M.E., Hammond, N.V.: Graphical argumentation and design cognition. HCI 12(3), 267–300 (1997)
Suthers, D.D.: Empirical studies of the value of conceptually explicit notations in collaborative learning. In: Okada, A., Buckingham Shum, S., Sherborne, T. (eds.) Knowledge Cartography, pp. 1–23. Springer (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lynch, C.F., Ashley, K.D., Chi, M. (2014). Can Diagrams Predict Essay Grades?. In: Trausan-Matu, S., Boyer, K.E., Crosby, M., Panourgia, K. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8474. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_32
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07220-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07221-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)