A comparative study of the human, automated scoring model, and GPT-4 ratings of young EFL students’ writing

Large language models, such as OpenAI’s GPT-4, have the potential to revolutionize automated writing evaluation (AWE). The present study examines the performance of the GPT-4 model in evaluating the writing of young English as a foreign language learners. Responses to three constructed response tasks ( n = 1908) on Educational Testing Service’s (ETS’s) TOEFL Junior ® Writing test were scored using two different GPT-4 prompting methods. Scores predicted by the two GPT-4 prompting methods and the TOEFL Junior Writing test’s operational AWE model were compared against human ratings to evaluate the performance of each method in terms of several measures. The results indicated that there are inconsistencies in the performance of the GPT-4 models depending on the measures, task types, and test forms, compared to the test’s AWE model and human ratings. Implications of the findings for practice and further research are discussed.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Language Testing
Published
2025-06-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322251346860
Primary Topic
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparative study of the human, automated scoring model, and GPT-4 ratings of young EFL students’ writing

Michael Suhan, Mikyung Kim Wolf
Language Testing
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
article

A comparative study of the human, automated scoring model, and GPT-4 ratings of young EFL students’ writing

Michael Suhan, Mikyung Kim Wolf
article en

Abstract

Large language models, such as OpenAI’s GPT-4, have the potential to revolutionize automated writing evaluation (AWE). The present study examines the performance of the GPT-4 model in evaluating the writing of young English as a foreign language learners. Responses to three constructed response tasks ( n = 1908) on Educational Testing Service’s (ETS’s) TOEFL Junior ® Writing test were scored using two different GPT-4 prompting methods. Scores predicted by the two GPT-4 prompting methods and the TOEFL Junior Writing test’s operational AWE model were compared against human ratings to evaluate the performance of each method in terms of several measures. The results indicated that there are inconsistencies in the performance of the GPT-4 models depending on the measures, task types, and test forms, compared to the test’s AWE model and human ratings. Implications of the findings for practice and further research are discussed.

Language TestingVol. 43(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.