Evaluating an AI speaking assessment tool: score accuracy, perceived validity, and oral peer feedback as feedback enhancement
Evaluating an AI speaking assessment tool: score accuracy, perceived validity, and oral peer feedback as feedback enhancement
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has significantly transformed language learning approaches and outcomes. However, research on AI-assisted English for Academic Purposes (EAP) speaking classrooms remains sparse. This study evaluates "EAP Talk", an AI-assisted speaking assessment tool, examining its effectiveness in two contexts: controlled tasks (Reading Aloud) that elicit non-spontaneous speech, and uncontrolled tasks (Presentation) that generate spontaneous speech. The research assessed accuracy and validity of EAP Talk scores through analysing 20 Reading Aloud and 20 Presentation recordings randomly selected from a pool of 64 undergraduate students. These recordings were graded by five experienced EAP teachers using Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ) – a comparative scoring method – and the traditional rubric rating approach. Acknowledging the limitation of EAP Talk in providing scores without detailed feedback, the study further investigated its perceived validity and examined oral peer feedback as a complementary enhancement strategy. Semi-structured interviews with four students were conducted to investigate their perceptions of the AI-assisted assessment process, focusing on the benefits of EAP Talk in enhancing learning, its limitations, and the effectiveness of oral peer feedback. Scoring concordance analysis shows that EAP Talk performs well in the controlled task but less so in the uncontrolled one. Content analysis on the interview data reveals that EAP Talk facilitates student confidence and positively shapes learning styles, while oral peer feedback markedly improves speaking skills through effective human-computer collaboration. The study calls for more precise AI assessments in uncontrolled tasks and proposes pedagogical strategies to better integrate AI into EAP speaking contexts.
AI-assisted speaking assessment, Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ), English for Academic Purposes (EAP), Human-computer collaboration, Oral peer feedback
Liu, Xu Jared
ea70bfaa-a56d-43a5-8e7e-6d945f7f6671
Wang, Jingwen
cc8084da-aafe-4bb1-8c3e-28fe5da8a1f5
Zou, Bin
6380a483-3ee8-41bd-a1b2-3d9bdac731bb
7 April 2025
Liu, Xu Jared
ea70bfaa-a56d-43a5-8e7e-6d945f7f6671
Wang, Jingwen
cc8084da-aafe-4bb1-8c3e-28fe5da8a1f5
Zou, Bin
6380a483-3ee8-41bd-a1b2-3d9bdac731bb
Liu, Xu Jared, Wang, Jingwen and Zou, Bin
(2025)
Evaluating an AI speaking assessment tool: score accuracy, perceived validity, and oral peer feedback as feedback enhancement.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 75, [101505].
(doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101505).
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has significantly transformed language learning approaches and outcomes. However, research on AI-assisted English for Academic Purposes (EAP) speaking classrooms remains sparse. This study evaluates "EAP Talk", an AI-assisted speaking assessment tool, examining its effectiveness in two contexts: controlled tasks (Reading Aloud) that elicit non-spontaneous speech, and uncontrolled tasks (Presentation) that generate spontaneous speech. The research assessed accuracy and validity of EAP Talk scores through analysing 20 Reading Aloud and 20 Presentation recordings randomly selected from a pool of 64 undergraduate students. These recordings were graded by five experienced EAP teachers using Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ) – a comparative scoring method – and the traditional rubric rating approach. Acknowledging the limitation of EAP Talk in providing scores without detailed feedback, the study further investigated its perceived validity and examined oral peer feedback as a complementary enhancement strategy. Semi-structured interviews with four students were conducted to investigate their perceptions of the AI-assisted assessment process, focusing on the benefits of EAP Talk in enhancing learning, its limitations, and the effectiveness of oral peer feedback. Scoring concordance analysis shows that EAP Talk performs well in the controlled task but less so in the uncontrolled one. Content analysis on the interview data reveals that EAP Talk facilitates student confidence and positively shapes learning styles, while oral peer feedback markedly improves speaking skills through effective human-computer collaboration. The study calls for more precise AI assessments in uncontrolled tasks and proposes pedagogical strategies to better integrate AI into EAP speaking contexts.
Text
1-s2.0-S1475158525000360-main
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 18 March 2025
e-pub ahead of print date: 7 April 2025
Published date: 7 April 2025
Keywords:
AI-assisted speaking assessment, Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ), English for Academic Purposes (EAP), Human-computer collaboration, Oral peer feedback
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 503192
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/503192
ISSN: 1475-1585
PURE UUID: 983450ed-59fa-4090-81f9-b7d14954c816
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 23 Jul 2025 16:43
Last modified: 22 Aug 2025 02:31
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Xu Jared Liu
Author:
Jingwen Wang
Author:
Bin Zou
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics