Using entity-based features to model coherence in student essays

NAACL HLT 2010 - Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Main Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 681-684

  Burstein, Jill ^a   Tetreault, Joel ^a   Andreyev, Slava ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NOISY DATA; STUDENT ESSAYS;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84858376776     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (9)

1. Aktas, R. N., & Cortes, V. (2008). Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 3-14.
2. Attali, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater v.2.0. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 4(3).
3. Barzilay, R. and Lapata, M. (2008). Modeling local coherence: An entity-based approach. Computational Linguistics, 34(1), 1-34.
4. Foltz, P., Kintsch, W., and Landauer, T. K. (1998). The measurement of textual coherence with Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2&3):285-307.
5. Higgins, D., Burstein, J., Marcu, D., & Gentile, C. (2004). Evaluating multiple aspects of coherence in student essays. In Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2004, Boston, MA.
6. Grosz, B., Joshi, A., and Weinstein, S. 1995, Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2): 203-226.
7. Hearst, M. A. (1997). TextTiling: Segmenting text into multi-paragraph subtopic passages. Computational Linguistics, 23(1):33-6
8. Miltsakaki, E. and Kukich, K. (2000). Automated evaluation of coherence in student essays. In Proceedings of LREC 2000, Athens, Greece
9. Pitler, E.,and Nenkova, A (2008). Revisiting Readability: A Unified Framework for Predicting Text Quality. In Proceedings of EMNLP 2008, Honolulu, Hawaii.