Jiangang Hao

Jiangang Hao

Writing is a foundational literacy skill that underpins effective communication, fosters critical thinking, facilitates learning across disciplines, and enables individuals to organize and articulate complex ideas. Consequently, writing assessment plays a vital role in evaluating language proficiency, communicative effectiveness, and analytical reasoning. The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has made it increasingly easy to generate coherent, high-quality essays, raising significant concerns about the authenticity of student-submitted work. This chapter first provides an overview of the current landscape of detectors for AI-generated and AI-assisted essays, along with guidelines for their responsible use. It then presents empirical analyses to evaluate how well detectors trained on essays from one LLM generalize to identifying essays produced by other LLMs, based on essays generated in response to public GRE writing prompts. These findings provide guidance for developing and retraining detectors for practical applications.

Jiangang Hao, Michael Fauss

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the implementation and acceptance of remotely proctored high-stake assessments. While the flexible administration of the tests brings forth many values, it raises test security-related concerns. Meanwhile, artificial intelligence (AI) has witnessed tremendous advances in the last five years. Many AI tools (such as the very recent ChatGPT) can generate high-quality responses to test items. These new developments require test security research beyond the statistical analysis of scores and response time. Data analytics and AI methods based on clickstream process data can get us deeper insight into the test-taking process and hold great promise for securing remotely administered high-stakes tests. This chapter uses real-world examples to show that this is indeed the case.

Jiangang Hao, Wenju Cui, Patrick Kyllonen et al.

Collaborative problem solving (CPS) is widely recognized as a critical 21st-century skill. Assessing CPS depends heavily on coding the communication data using a construct-relevant framework, and this process has long been a major bottleneck to scaling up such assessments. Based on five datasets and two coding frameworks, we demonstrate that ChatGPT can code communication data to a satisfactory level, though performance varies across ChatGPT models, and depends on the coding framework and task characteristics. Interestingly, newer reasoning-focused models such as GPT-o1-mini and GPT-o3-mini do not necessarily yield better coding results. Additionally, we show that refining prompts based on feedback from miscoded cases can improve coding accuracy in some instances, though the effectiveness of this approach is not consistent across all tasks. These findings offer practical guidance for researchers and practitioners in developing scalable, efficient methods to analyze communication data in support of 21st-century skill assessment.

Jiangang Hao, Wenju Cui, Patrick Kyllonen et al.

Assessing communication and collaboration at scale depends on a labor intensive task of coding communication data into categories according to different frameworks. Prior research has established that ChatGPT can be directly instructed with coding rubrics to code the communication data and achieves accuracy comparable to human raters. However, whether the coding from ChatGPT or similar AI technology exhibits bias against different demographic groups, such as gender and race, remains unclear. To fill this gap, this paper investigates ChatGPT-based automated coding of communication data using a typical coding framework for collaborative problem solving, examining differences across gender and racial groups. The analysis draws on data from three types of collaborative tasks: negotiation, problem solving, and decision making. Our results show that ChatGPT-based coding exhibits no significant bias across gender and racial groups, paving the road for its adoption in large-scale assessment of collaboration and communication.

Yang Zhong, Jiangang Hao, Michael Fauss et al.

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has enabled the generation of coherent essays, making AI-assisted writing increasingly common in educational and professional settings. Using large-scale empirical data, we examine and benchmark the characteristics and quality of essays generated by popular LLMs and discuss their implications for two key components of writing assessments: automated scoring and academic integrity. Our findings highlight limitations in existing automated scoring systems, such as e-rater, when applied to essays generated or heavily influenced by AI, and identify areas for improvement, including the development of new features to capture deeper thinking and recalibrating feature weights. Despite growing concerns that the increasing variety of LLMs may undermine the feasibility of detecting AI-generated essays, our results show that detectors trained on essays generated from one model can often identify texts from others with high accuracy, suggesting that effective detection could remain manageable in practice.