Advertisement

Identifying Weak Sentences in Student Drafts: A Tutoring System

  • Samuel González López
  • Steven Bethard
  • Aurelio López-López
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 292)

Abstract

The first draft of an undergraduate student thesis generally presents deficiencies, which must be polished with the help of the academic advisor to get an acceptable document. However, this task is repeated every time a student prepares his thesis, becoming extra time spent by the advisor. Our work seeks to help the student improve the writing, based on intelligent tutoring and natural language processing techniques. For the current study, we focus primarily on the conclusions section of a thesis. In this paper we present three tutoring system components: Identifying Weak Sentences, Classifying the Weak Sentences, Customizing Feedback to Students. Our system identifies weaknesses in sentences, such as the use of general instead of specific terms, or the absence of reflections and personal opinions. We provide initial models and their evaluations for each component.

Keywords

Weak sentences Thesis drafts Conclusion evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Muñoz, C.: Como elaborar y asesorar una Investigación de tesis. Prentice Hall (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Crossley, S.A., Varner, L.K., Roscoe, R.D., McNamara, D.S.: Using Automated Indices of Cohesion to Evaluate an Intelligent Tutoring System and an Automated Writing Evaluation System. In: Lane, H.C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS, vol. 7926, pp. 269–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crossley, S., Roscoe, R., McNamara, D.: Using Automatic Scoring Models to Detect Changes in Student Writing in an Intelligent Tutoring System. In: Procs. 26th FLAIRS, pp. 208–213 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olney, A.M., D’Mello, S., Person, N., Cade, W., Hays, P., Williams, C., Lehman, B., Graesser, A.: Guru: A Computer Tutor That Models Expert Human Tutors. In: Cerri, S.A., Clancey, W.J., Papadourakis, G., Panourgia, K. (eds.) ITS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7315, pp. 256–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Graesser, A., D’Mello, S., Craig, S., Witherspoon, A., Sullins, B., McDaniel, B., Gholson, B.: The Relationship between Affective States and Dialog Patterns during Interactions with Autotutor. Interactive Learning Research 19, 293–312 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bethard, S., Okoye, I., Arafat, S., Hang, M.J., Sumner, T.: Identifying science concepts and student misconceptions in an interactive essay writing tutor. In: Procs. of the 7th Workshop on Building Educational Applications Using NLP, pp. 12–21 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bellegarda, J.: Unsupervised document clustering using multiresolution latent semantic density analysis. In: Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing, pp. 361–366 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    García Gorrostieta, J.M., González López, S., López-López, A., Carrillo, M.: An intelligent tutoring system to evaluate and advise on lexical richness in students writings. In: Hernández-Leo, D., Ley, T., Klamma, R., Harrer, A. (eds.) EC-TEL 2013. LNCS, vol. 8095, pp. 548–551. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kilicoglu, H., Bergler, S.: Recognizing speculative language in biomedical research articles: a linguistically motivated perspective. In: Procs. of the Workshop on Current Trends in Biomedical Natural Language Processing, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, pp. 46–53 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samuel González López
    • 1
  • Steven Bethard
    • 2
  • Aurelio López-López
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics and ElectronicsTonantzintlaMéxico
  2. 2.University of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA

Personalised recommendations