Modeling the language assessment process and result: Proposed architecture for automatic oral proficiency assessment

We outline challenges for modeling human language assessment in automatic systems, both in terms of the process and the reliability of the result. We propose an architecture for a system to evaluate learners of Spanish via the Computerized Oral Proficiency Instrument, to determine whether they have 'reached' or 'not reached' the Intermediate Low level of proficiency, according to the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Speaking Proficiency Guidelines. Our system divides the acoustic and non-acoustic features, incorporating human process modeling where permitted by the technology and required by the domain. We suggest machine learning techniques applied to this type of system permit insight into yet unarticulated aspects of the human rating process.

[1]  M. S. Whitley Spanish/English contrasts : a course in Spanish linguistics , 1987 .

[2]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Speech Perception in Infants , 1971, Science.

[3]  H. Sussman,et al.  Performance on a Test of Categorical Perception of Speech in Normal and Communication Disordered Children. , 1979 .

[4]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Information Conveyed by Vowels , 1957 .

[5]  Yoon Kim,et al.  Automatic pronunciation scoring for language instruction , 1997, 1997 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[6]  Yeshwant K. Muthusamy,et al.  A Segmental Approach to Automatic Language Identification , 1993 .

[7]  Bonnie J. Dorr,et al.  Interlingual Machine Translation: A Parameterized Approach , 1993, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Ronald A. Cole,et al.  A segment-based approach to automatic language identification , 1991, [Proceedings] ICASSP 91: 1991 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[9]  Bonnie J. Dorr,et al.  Enhancing automatic acquisition of the thematic structure in a large-scale lexicon for Mandarin Chinese , 1998, AMTA.

[10]  Sanjeev Khudanpur,et al.  Is automatic speech recognition ready for non-native speech? A data collection effort and initial experiments in modelling conversational Hispanic English , 1998 .

[11]  Monika Woszczyna,et al.  JANUS: Speech-to-Speech Translation Using Connectionist and Non-Connectionist Techniques , 1991, NIPS.

[12]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Adaptive Mixtures of Local Experts , 1991, Neural Computation.

[13]  Victor Zue,et al.  Recent improvements in an approach to segment-based automatic language identification , 1994, ICSLP.

[14]  Fernando Pereira,et al.  Inside-Outside Reestimation From Partially Bracketed Corpora , 1992, HLT.

[15]  Shubha Kadambe,et al.  Spontaneous speech language identification with a knowledge of linguistics , 1994, ICSLP.

[16]  A. Weinberg,et al.  A Principle-based Parser for Foreign Language Training in German and Arabic , 1993, IWPT.

[17]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning , 1992 .

[18]  Martin Chodorow,et al.  Automated Scoring Using A Hybrid Feature Identification Technique , 1998, ACL.

[19]  Etienne Barnard,et al.  Language identification of six languages based on a common set of broad phonemes , 1994, ICSLP.

[20]  Bonnie J. Dorr,et al.  Machine Translation: A View from the Lexicon , 1994, CL.

[21]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Hierarchies of Adaptive Experts , 1991, NIPS.

[22]  Farzad Ehsani,et al.  Speech Technology in Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Strengths and Limitations of a New CALL Paradigm. , 1998 .

[23]  Carl de Marcken,et al.  Lexical Heads, Phrase Structure and the Induction of Grammar , 1995, VLC@ACL.

[24]  J. Ohala,et al.  Listeners’ Normalization of Vowel Quality Is Influenced by ‘Restored’ Consonantal Context , 1994 .