AI scoring vs human scoring for language tests: What's the difference?

Charlotte Guest
A girl sat at a desk with a laptop and notepad studying and taking notes
Reading time: 6 minutes

When entering the world of language proficiency tests, test takers are often faced with a dilemma: Should they opt for tests scored by humans or those assessed by artificial intelligence (AI)? The choice might seem trivial at first, but understanding the differences between AI scoring and human language test scoring can significantly impact preparation strategy and, ultimately, determine test outcomes.

The human touch in language proficiency testing and scoring

Historically, language tests have been scored by human assessors. This method leverages the nuanced understanding that humans have of language, including idiomatic expressions, cultural references, and the subtleties of tone and even writing style, akin to the capabilities of the human brain. Human scorers can appreciate the creative and original use of language, potentially rewarding test takers for flair and originality in their answers. Scorers are particularly effective at evaluating progress or achievement tests, which are designed to assess a student's language knowledge and progress after completing a particular chapter, unit, or at the end of a course, reflecting how well the language tester is performing in their language learning studies.

One significant difference between human and AI scoring is how they handle context. Human scorers can understand the significance and implications of a particular word or phrase in a given context, while AI algorithms rely on predetermined rules and datasets.

The adaptability and learning capabilities of human brains contribute significantly to the effectiveness of scoring in language tests, mirroring how these brains adjust and learn from new information.

Advantages:

  • Nuanced understanding: Human scorers are adept at interpreting the complexities and nuances of language that AI might miss.
  • Contextual flexibility: Humans can consider context beyond the written or spoken word, understanding cultural and situational implications.

Disadvantages:

  • Subjectivity and inconsistency: Despite rigorous training, human-based scoring can introduce a level of subjectivity and variability, potentially affecting the fairness and reliability of scores.
  • Time and resource intensive: Human-based scoring is labor-intensive and time-consuming, often resulting in longer waiting times for results.
  • Human bias: Assessors, despite being highly trained and experienced, bring their own perspectives, preferences and preconceptions into the grading process. This can lead to variability in scoring, where two equally competent test takers might receive different scores based on the scorer's subjective judgment.

The rise of AI in language test scoring

With advancements in technology, AI-based scoring systems have started to play a significant role in language assessment. These systems utilize algorithms and natural language processing (NLP) techniques to evaluate test responses. AI scoring promises objectivity and efficiency, offering a standardized way to assess language and proficiency level.

Advantages:

  • Consistency: AI scoring systems provide a consistent scoring method, applying the same criteria across all test takers, thereby reducing the potential for bias.
  • Speed: AI can process and score tests much faster than human scorers can, leading to quicker results turnaround.
  • Great for more nervous testers: Not everyone likes having to take a test in front of a person, so AI removes that extra stress.

Disadvantages:

  • Lack of nuance recognition: AI may not fully understand subtle nuances, creativity, or complex structures in language the way a human scorer can.
  • Dependence on data: The effectiveness of AI scoring is heavily reliant on the data it has been trained on, which can limit its ability to interpret less common responses accurately.

Making the choice

When deciding between tests scored by humans or AI, consider the following factors:

  • Your strengths: If you have a creative flair and excel at expressing original thoughts, human-scored tests might appreciate your unique approach more. Conversely, if you excel in structured language use and clear, concise expression, AI-scored tests could work to your advantage.
  • Your goals: Consider why you're taking the test. Some organizations might prefer one scoring method over the other, so it's worth investigating their preferences.
  • Preparation time: If you're on a tight schedule, the quicker turnaround time of AI-scored tests might be beneficial.

Ultimately, both scoring methods aim to measure and assess language proficiency accurately. The key is understanding how each approach aligns with your personal strengths and goals.

The bias factor in language testing

An often-discussed concern in both AI and human language test scoring is the issue of bias. With AI scoring, biases can be ingrained in the algorithms due to the data they are trained on, but if the system is well designed, bias can be removed and provide fairer scoring.

Conversely speaking, human scorers, despite their best efforts to remain objective, bring their own subconscious biases to the evaluation process. These biases might be related to a test taker's accent, dialect, or even the content of their responses, which could subtly influence the scorer's perceptions and judgments. Efforts are continually made to mitigate these biases in both approaches to ensure a fair and equitable assessment for all test takers.

Preparing for success in foreign language proficiency tests

Regardless of the scoring method, thorough preparation remains, of course, crucial. Familiarize yourself with the test format, practice under timed conditions, and seek feedback on your performance, whether from teachers, peers, or through self-assessment tools.

The distinctions between AI scoring and human in language tests continue to blur, with many exams now incorporating a mix of both to have students leverage their respective strengths. Understanding and interpreting written language is essential in preparing for language proficiency tests, especially for reading tests. By understanding these differences, test takers can better prepare for their exams, setting themselves up for the best possible outcome.

Will AI replace human-marked tests?

The question of whether AI will replace markers in language tests is complex and multifaceted. On one hand, the efficiency, consistency and scalability of AI scoring systems present a compelling case for their increased utilization. These systems can process vast numbers of tests in a fraction of the time it takes markers, providing quick feedback that is invaluable in educational settings. On the other hand, the nuanced understanding, contextual knowledge, flexibility, and ability to appreciate the subtleties of language that human markers bring to the table are qualities that AI has yet to fully replicate.

Both AI and human-based scoring aim to accurately assess language proficiency levels, such as those defined by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the Global Scale of English, where a level like C2 or 85-90 indicates that a student can understand virtually everything, master the foreign language perfectly, and potentially have superior knowledge compared to a native speaker.

The integration of AI in language testing is less about replacement and more about complementing and enhancing the existing processes. AI can handle the objective, clear-cut aspects of language testing, freeing markers to focus on the more subjective, nuanced responses that require a human touch. This hybrid approach could lead to a more robust, efficient and fair assessment system, leveraging the strengths of both humans and AI.

Future developments in AI technology and machine learning may narrow the gap between AI and human grading capabilities. However, the ethical considerations, such as ensuring fairness and addressing bias, along with the desire to maintain a human element in education, suggest that a balanced approach will persist. In conclusion, while AI will increasingly play a significant role in language testing, it is unlikely to completely replace markers. Instead, the future lies in finding the optimal synergy between technological advancements and human judgment to enhance the fairness, accuracy and efficiency of language proficiency assessments.

Tests to let your language skills shine through

Explore Pearson's innovative language testing solutions today and discover how we are blending the best of AI technology and our own expertise to offer you reliable, fair and efficient language proficiency assessments. We are committed to offering reliable and credible proficiency tests, ensuring that our certifications are recognized for job applications, university admissions, citizenship applications, and by employers worldwide. Whether you're gearing up for academic, professional, or personal success, our tests are designed to meet your diverse needs and help unlock your full potential.

Take the next step in your language learning journey with Pearson and experience the difference that a meticulously crafted test can make.

Explore our wide range of English language tests

More blogs from Pearson

  • Two business people standing together drawing on a notepad
    From first chat to offer letter: how PTE English simplifies admissions for international students
    By Alice Bazzi
    Reading time: 2 minutes

    Every step in the admissions process matters. For students, the journey from initial counselling to receiving an offer letter can feel overwhelming. For agents, delays and complications can often lead to missed deadlines and opportunities lost. The good news? PTE Express has recently been introduced and is designed to remove friction at every stage, making the process faster, simpler and more reliable for everyone involved.

    What slows down admissions success?

    Traditional English testing often introduces unnecessary friction. Students may have to travel to test centers, wait weeks for results or navigate complex booking systems. These delays create stress and a level of uncertainty, especially with international studies as there will be strict timelines. Agents know that every day counts; when scores do not arrive on time, applications stall, and the risk of students losing their place increases.

  • A teacher handing out papers to her students
    Elevating English Language teaching in the age of AI: Why the GSE matters more than ever
    By Nancy Reeves
    Reading time: 4 minutes

    Educators and schools share a common objective: to deliver high-quality learning experiences and support student success. As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms society, this objective becomes increasingly significant. English language instruction now requires preparing students to thrive in a globalized, digital and automated environment.

    The challenge: Teaching English amid rapid change

    Artificial intelligence has shifted expectations for language learning. Students now have access to instant translation, auto-generated texts, speech-to-text and various language applications. However, these tools can present challenges in the classroom. For instance, students may become overly dependent on instant translation rather than developing their own language proficiency. Educators must ensure that students engage in authentic learning rather than using technology to bypass difficult tasks. Additionally, some students may use AI to complete written assignments, hindering the development of their writing skills. These challenges underscore the need for schools to integrate technology thoughtfully while maintaining a focus on genuine learning.

    In response to these developments, it is essential to enhance both teaching and assessment practices. The emphasis should remain on teachers’ core strengths: guiding, mentoring and fostering critical thinking and communication skills that technology cannot replicate.

    Why standards matter more than ever

    In my role as a curriculum director, I recognized the critical importance of establishing clear standards and objectives. These standards serve as navigational tools, guiding instructional decisions and enabling timely adjustments in classroom practice. For example, if a teacher identifies a need to enhance students’ communication skills, they can incorporate additional group activities. Standards support educators in the following ways:

    • Understand what students can truly do at each proficiency level.
    • Measure progress in a meaningful, learner-centered way.
    • Build intentional learning pathways.
    • Design interventions based on evidence, not intuition.

    Upon discovering the GSE “Can Do” statements, I recognized a framework that is both transparent and practical. Unlike broad descriptors, the GSE delineates language learning into specific, measurable skills aligned with authentic English usage. For instance, rather than stating that a student can "understand basic spoken directions", the GSE specifies that a student can "follow detailed multi-step instructions in familiar contexts". This level of detail provides a clearer understanding of students’ actual capabilities.

    A shift in perspective: From measuring to understanding

    A key advantage of the GSE is its transformative approach to student assessment. The process begins by asking, “What can students do now? What should they work on next?” Research indicates that dividing tasks into manageable steps reduces student anxiety and increases motivation. This approach fosters a sense of accomplishment and self-efficacy, both of which are essential for sustained language acquisition.

    This shift is significant. It alleviates pressure on learners and promotes a deeper understanding of their strengths, learning preferences and challenges. Additionally, it equips teachers with actionable insights, encouraging the development of new strategies and evidence-based instructional decisions.

    Tiered intervention: Where the impact became visible

    At our school, we introduced the GSE to support students needing tiered intervention. The transformation was gradual but encouraging. For instance, at our school, we started using the GSE to help students who needed extra support. The changes took time, but we saw good results. In the first semester, 60% of students in the program improved their English by at least one level, as measured by the GSE "Can Do" statements.

    One student said, "For the first time, I felt like I was making real progress in understanding English." Teachers stopped using general support and focused on specific actions linked to the "Can Do" statements. Students kept improving in English and felt more confident as they reached clear goals. AI can generate text, translate, and simulate conversation, but cannot replace the teacher’s role in developing empathy and nuanced understanding.

    In one classroom moment, a student struggled to interpret the tone and emotion of a literary work, which AI could translate but could not fully convey the depth of feeling. The teacher stepped in and guided the class in exploring the subtleties of the text, illustrating the emotions, historical context, and cultural significance behind the words. This human interaction highlighted the teacher's unique ability to foster deeper comprehension and emotional intelligence.

    Frameworks such as the GSE ensure that language learning remains centered on student development and the human dimensions of education.

    Moving forward with purpose

    As artificial intelligence accelerates change, our responsibility is to utilize tools and frameworks that enhance, but do not supplant, the human aspects of learning.

    The GSE provides a structured approach to tracking progress, adapting to individual student needs and designing effective lessons.

    English teaching is not in competition with AI; it is growing alongside it. Good frameworks and thoughtful teaching help students learn language and succeed in a world where communication, flexibility and human connection are key. I encourage you to try the GSE in your classes or programs. By using this framework, we can make language learning more effective and inclusive for everyone. Let’s work together to help education grow with new technology.

  • Great-grandmother and child read book in park
    Learning my family language with Mondly by Pearson
    By Hannah Lawrence
    Reading time: 5 minutes

    Although I’ve worked as a copywriter and editor for most of my career, I’ve always struggled to learn any language other than English. I still remember the humiliation at school as our French teacher walked between the desks, asking each of my classmates if they would continue studying French at a higher level. When she reached my desk, she stopped, looked at me, shook her head, and moved on. I wasn’t even invited to try.