JP7468132B2 - Evaluation creation device, evaluation creation method, and program - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a technology that automatically creates evaluations for students based on test results.

Conventionally, systems have been known that store the test results administered to students in a database and allow them to be checked on a computer. Patent Document 1 discloses an educational support system that has a performance aggregation database that aggregates the test scores of learners and is configured so that the database can be accessed from a tablet terminal device.

JP 2016-65987 A

It would be useful for teachers and students if the test results for students were displayed and output not only in the form of scores and deviation values, but also in the form of advice that would be useful for the student when reviewing the material and an evaluation that would increase their motivation to learn.

The present invention has been made to solve the problems described above, and its main objective is to provide an evaluation creation device that automatically creates evaluations for each student based on test results.

In one aspect of the present invention, an assessment creation device that creates an assessment for a student based on the result of a test consisting of a plurality of questions comprises: a comparison unit that compares an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a problem level indicating the difficulty of the questions; an assessment creation unit that creates an assessment for the student of the test including the result of the comparison by the comparison unit; an output unit that outputs the assessment; a correctly answered problem identification unit that identifies the question as a correctly answered problem if the result of the comparison by the comparison unit indicates that the academic ability level is higher than the problem level; a receiving unit that receives written data indicating the answer to the question; a marking unit that judges whether the answer is correct or not based on the written data and scores the test; a grade information calculation unit that calculates grade information regarding the student's grade in the test based on the marking result by the marking unit; and a correction information calculation unit that calculates correction information regarding the student's grade in the test assuming that the correctly answered problem is correctly answered. The comparison unit compares the academic ability level of the student with the problem level of the questions for which the answers were incorrect, and the assessment includes the correctly answered problem, the grade information, and the correction information .

According to this aspect, the assessment creation device can compare the academic ability level of the student to be assessed with the level of questions constituting the test taken by the student, and automatically create an assessment according to the result of the test based on the result of the comparison. Also, according to this, the assessment creation device can show questions that could have been answered correctly if the student had demonstrated their ability but were answered incorrectly due to careless mistakes, etc., thereby improving motivation to learn. Also, according to this, the assessment creation device can display not only the actual grades, but also correction information when a question that could have been answered correctly is answered correctly.

In one aspect of the evaluation creation device, the evaluation includes a sentence indicating that the student has a high probability of answering the correctly answerable question correctly given his/her academic ability level. This allows the student to be presented with questions that can be answered correctly if the student demonstrates his/her ability, and encourages effective review.

In one aspect of the evaluation creation device, the evaluation visually indicates the questions that can be answered correctly by using marks. This makes it possible to visually and easily indicate questions that can be answered correctly if the user demonstrates their ability by using marks.

In one aspect of the assessment creation device, the assessment indicates that if the correctly answered question is answered correctly, the student's grade will become the correction information. In this way, the correction information allows a viewer of the assessment to clearly recognize the grade that the student could achieve if he or she puts in a little more effort.

In one aspect of the evaluation creation device, the evaluation visually indicates, by one or more of a graph and a mark, that if the correctly answered question is answered correctly, the student's grade will become the correction information. This makes it possible to visually and easily show the correction information in the case where the correctly answered question is answered correctly, by using a graph or a mark.

In another aspect of the evaluation creation device, the performance information calculation unit calculates the test score of the student based on the grading results, and the correction information calculation unit calculates a corrected score by adding the points allocated to the correctly answered questions to the test score, and the evaluation includes the score and the corrected score. In this way, the actual test score and the corrected score in the case where the correctly answered questions are correctly answered are displayed, so that the viewer can clearly recognize the score that he or she could get if he or she tried a little harder, which can increase motivation to learn.

In another aspect of the present invention, there is provided an assessment creation method executed by an assessment creation device that creates an assessment for a student according to the result of a test consisting of a plurality of questions, the method comprising: performing a comparison process that compares an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a question level indicating the difficulty of the questions, creating an assessment for the student of the test including a result of the comparison process , outputting the assessment , and if the result of the comparison process indicates that the academic ability level is higher than the question level, identifying the question as a question that can be answered correctly, receiving written data indicating an answer to the question, determining whether the answer is correct or not based on the written data, scoring the test, calculating performance information regarding the student's performance in the test based on the grading result, and calculating correction information regarding the student's performance in the test assuming that the correct answer question is answered correctly, the comparison process compares the academic ability level of the student with the question level of the questions whose answers were incorrect, and the assessment includes the correct answer question, the performance information, and the correction information . By executing this assessment creation method, the assessment creation device can automatically create an assessment according to the result of the test taken by a target student.

In yet another aspect of the present invention, there is provided a program executed by an assessment creation device having a computer, which creates an assessment for a student in accordance with the results of a test consisting of a plurality of questions, the program including a comparison unit which compares an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a problem level indicating the difficulty of the questions, an assessment creation unit which creates an assessment for the student of the test including a result of the comparison by the comparison unit, an output unit which outputs the assessment , a correctly answered problem identification unit which identifies the question as a correctly answered problem if the academic ability level is higher than the problem level as a result of the comparison by the comparison unit, and a receiving unit which receives written data indicating an answer to the problem. The computer is made to function as a receiving unit, a marking unit which judges whether the answer is correct or not based on the entered data and scores the test, a grade information calculation unit which calculates grade information relating to the student's grade in the test based on the marking result by the marking unit, and a correction information calculation unit which calculates correction information relating to the student's grade in the test assuming that the correct answer question is answered correctly , the comparison unit compares the academic ability level of the student with the problem level of the question for which the answer was incorrect, and the evaluation includes the correct answer question, the grade information, and the correction information . By installing this program in a computer and running it, the evaluation creation device of the present invention can be configured.

The evaluation creation device according to the present invention can automatically create evaluations for each student based on the test results.

1 shows a configuration of an evaluation creating system according to an embodiment. 2 is a block diagram showing an internal configuration of a management server. This is an example of a correspondence table between question level and academic ability level. 13 is an example of a list of evaluation results. 13 is a flowchart of a scoring process. 13 is a flowchart of an evaluation creation process. 1 shows a configuration of an evaluation creating system according to a first modified example. 13 shows a configuration of an evaluation creating system according to a second modified example.

Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.
[overall structure]
1 shows the configuration of an assessment creation system to which the assessment creation device of the present invention is applied. The assessment creation system 100 is configured so that an entry device 10 and a connection device 12 provided on the student side (school), a management server 20, and a teacher terminal 60 provided on the teacher side can communicate with each other via a network 5. The assessment includes information on the results of a test conducted by a target student, advice to the student based on the test results, etc.

On the student side, a writing device 10 and a connection device 12 are provided for each student to use. The writing device 10 is a combination of a tablet 10a and a touch pen 10b. That is, when a student takes a test or exercise, he or she writes answers on the tablet 10a with the touch pen 10b. Note that for convenience, only one tablet 10a and one touch pen 10b are shown in FIG. 1, but in reality, the number of tablets 10a and touch pens 10b used corresponds to the number of students.

The connection device 12 is a communication terminal for transmitting data received from the writing device 10 to the outside. The connection device 12 is, for example, a PC or a smartphone, and receives the writing data D1 from the writing device 10. The communication between the writing device 10 and the connection device 12 may be wireless or wired. In this embodiment, the writing data D1 is answer information entered by the student using a combination of the tablet 10a and the touch pen 10b. The connection device 12 transmits the received writing data D1 to the management server 20 via the network 5. Note that the communication between the connection device 12 and the management server 20 via the network 5 may be wired or wireless.

The management server 20 is connected to a test information database (hereinafter, "database" will be referred to as "DB") 42, a test result DB 44, and an evaluation information DB 46. The management server 20 receives the data D1 entered by each student from the student's connected device 12, and grades the test by determining whether the answers entered by the students are correct. The management server 20 then creates evaluation result list data D2 including an evaluation of each student according to the test results, and transmits this to the teacher terminal 60 via the network 5. The communication between the management server 20 and the teacher terminal 60 via the network 5 may be wired or wireless.

The teacher terminal 60 provided on the teacher's side is, for example, a desktop PC, laptop PC, tablet PC, etc. If the teacher terminal 60 is a tablet PC, a communication terminal such as the connection device 12 provided on the student's side may be provided on the teacher's side. The teacher terminal 60 has a display unit such as an LCD display. The teacher terminal 60 receives the evaluation result list data D2 from the management server 20 and displays it on the display unit of the teacher terminal 60.

[Administration Server Configuration]
2 is a block diagram showing the internal configuration of the management server 20. The management server 20 includes a communication unit 21, a question level setting unit 22, a marking unit 23, a marking result information calculation unit 24, a grade information calculation unit 25, an academic ability level specification unit 26, a question level specification unit 27, a comparison unit 28, a correctly answered question specification unit 29, a correction information calculation unit 30, and an evaluation creation unit 31. These components, a test information DB 42, a test result DB 44, and an evaluation information DB 46 are connected to each other via a bus 50.

The communication unit 21 is a communication unit for communicating with the connected device 12 on the student side and the teacher terminal 60 on the teacher side via the network 5. Specifically, the communication unit 21 receives entry data D1 from the connected device 12 on the student side and transmits evaluation result list data D2 to the teacher terminal 60.

Test information DB42 stores test information, which is information about tests to be administered to students. In addition to information about test questions, answer information, unit name, study period, etc., test information includes question level information indicating the difficulty of the questions that make up the test. As will be described in detail later, the question level is set in advance for each question. Note that test information may also include an average score calculated as a result of multiple students taking the test, the percentage of correct answers for each question, etc.

Test result DB44 stores the results of tests taken by each student. Specifically, test result DB44 stores performance information for each student, such as the tests taken, the answers to each question written by the student, whether each question was correct or incorrect, the score, the deviation value, and the ranking.

The evaluation information DB46 stores evaluations based on the results of tests taken by each student. Specifically, the evaluation information DB46 stores, for each student, correction information such as the tests taken, questions that can be answered correctly, revised scores, revised standard deviations, and revised rankings. Questions that can be answered correctly are questions that a student can answer correctly if they demonstrate their ability, and are identified by comparing the academic ability level indicating the student's academic ability with the problem level indicating the difficulty of the question, as will be described in detail later. The revised score is the score obtained by adding the points allocated to questions that can be answered correctly to the test score, and is the score that would be obtained if it were assumed that the student demonstrated their ability in the test and answered the questions that can be answered correctly. The revised standard deviations and revised rankings are the standard deviations and rankings that would be obtained if it were assumed that the test score was the revised score.

The question level setting unit 22 sets a question level indicating the difficulty level of each question for the multiple questions that make up the test. Information on the question level set for each question is stored in the test information DB 42 as test information. FIG. 3 is an example of a correspondence table between question levels and academic ability levels. As shown in FIG. 3, the correspondence table associates question levels with academic ability levels at which a question can be answered correctly. For example, there are five question levels, from A, which is the least difficult, to E, which is the most difficult. As shown in the figure, question level A is difficulty level 1, and is a question that can be answered correctly by students with an academic ability level of a deviation value of 40 or more. Question level B is difficulty level 2, and is a question that can be answered correctly by students with an academic ability level of a deviation value of 45 or more. In this way, as the question level becomes higher, the academic ability level at which a question can be answered correctly also becomes higher in proportion.

The question level setting unit 22 can set the question level by applying a method of setting the difficulty level preset when creating the questions as is, or a method using IRT (Item Response Theory) analysis. IRT analysis is a test theory for measuring the characteristics of subjects (cognitive ability, knowledge, etc.) and the difficulty of the evaluation items based on responses to a group of evaluation items, and this makes it possible to calculate the difficulty of the questions that make up the test by utilizing the answer data of test takers.

In this embodiment, the correspondence between the question level and the academic ability level is as shown in the figure, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the question level stages and the corresponding academic ability levels can be set arbitrarily.

In this embodiment, the test consists of 10 questions, (1) to (10), with questions (1) and (2) set to level A, questions (3) and (4) to level B, questions (5) and (6) to level C, questions (7) and (8) to level D, and questions (9) and (10) to level E.

The marking unit 23 judges the correctness of the answers written by the students for each question based on the entry data D1 received from the student's connected device 12 and the test information stored in the test information DB 42, and grades the tests performed by each student. Specifically, the marking unit 23 extracts the strokes written by the students from the entry data D1, and obtains the entry contents by performing OCR (Optical Character Recognition) processing on the extracted strokes. The entry contents obtained here are the answers written by the students for each question. The marking unit 23 then refers to the answer information included in the test information and judges the correctness of the answers written by the students for each question, thereby grading the test. The marking unit 23 grades the test for all students who have performed the target test.

When the marking unit 23 has finished marking all the students' tests, the marking result information calculation unit 24 calculates the average test score, the percentage of correct answers for each question, etc. as marking result information and stores it in the test information DB 42.

The grade information calculation unit 25 calculates each student's test score, deviation value, ranking, correctness of each question, etc. as grade information based on the grading by the grading unit 23, and stores the information in the test result DB 44.

The academic ability level identification unit 26 identifies the academic ability level that indicates the academic ability of the student to be evaluated. In this embodiment, the academic ability level is the average of the most recent three deviation values, for example, a deviation value of "51" which is the average of the first semester deviation value of "51", the second semester deviation value of "55", and the current deviation value of "47". Note that the academic ability level is not limited to the average of the most recent three deviation values, and can be set at any level that indicates the student's academic ability.

The problem level identification unit 27 identifies a problem level indicating the difficulty of the problem to be compared with the academic ability level in the comparison unit 28 described below. Specifically, in this embodiment, the problem to be compared with the academic ability level is a problem that was answered incorrectly by the student to be evaluated. Therefore, the problem level identification unit 27 identifies the problem level of each of the problems that was answered incorrectly by the student based on the grade information stored in the test result DB 44.

The comparison unit 28 compares the academic ability level identified by the academic ability level identification unit 26 with the problem level identified by the problem level identification unit 27. Specifically, the comparison unit 28 compares the academic ability level of the student to be evaluated with the problem level of the problem that the student answered incorrectly.

For example, a comparison will be made between the student's academic level "deviation value 51" and the problem level "A" set for the problem (2) that the student answered incorrectly. According to the correspondence table in FIG. 3, the problem level "A" is a level of difficulty 1, and any student with an academic level of deviation value 40 or more can answer correctly. Since the student's academic level "deviation value 51" is a level of deviation 40 or more, in this case, the comparison unit 28 determines that the academic level is higher than the problem level. Next, a comparison will be made between the student's academic level "deviation value 51" and the problem level "D" set for the problem (7) that the student answered incorrectly. According to the correspondence table in FIG. 3, the problem level "D" is a level of difficulty 4, and any student with an academic level of deviation value 55 or more can answer correctly. Since the student's academic level "deviation value 51" is lower than the deviation value 55, in this case, the comparison unit 28 determines that the academic level is lower than the problem level.

The correctly answerable question identification unit 29 identifies questions for which the student's academic ability level is higher than the question level as correctly answerable questions based on the comparison made by the comparison unit 28. Correctly answerable questions are questions that the student could have answered correctly if he or she had been able to demonstrate their ability without making careless mistakes, and are stored in the evaluation information DB 46.

The correction information calculation unit 30 calculates the test score, standard deviation, and rank that would result if the correctly answered question were answered correctly as a corrected score, a corrected standard deviation, and a corrected rank, respectively. The calculated corrected score, corrected standard deviation, and corrected rank are stored in the evaluation information DB 46 as correction information.

The evaluation creation unit 31 creates a list of evaluation results (hereinafter referred to as the "evaluation result list") indicating the test results of each student and the evaluation of the student according to the test results by referring to the test information DB 42, the test result DB 44, and the evaluation information DB 46. The evaluation creation unit 31 also transmits evaluation result list data D2 indicating the created evaluation result list to the teacher terminal 60.

In the above configuration, the communication unit 21 of the management server 20 is an example of the receiving unit and output unit of the present invention, and the scoring unit 23, the grade information calculation unit 25, the comparison unit 28, the correctly answered question identification unit 29, the correction information calculation unit 30, and the evaluation creation unit 31 of the management server 20 are examples of the scoring unit, the grade information calculation unit, the comparison unit, the correctly answered question identification unit, the correction information calculation unit, and the evaluation creation unit of the present invention, respectively.

[Evaluation results list]
4 shows an example of an evaluation result list. As shown in the figure, the evaluation result list includes a name item 51, a grade transition item 52, a correct answer rate item 53, an evaluation item 54, and a score distribution item 55.

The name item 51 includes the grade, class, number, and name of the student being evaluated.

The grade progress item 52 includes the scores, average score, deviation value, and ranking for the first semester, second semester, and current term. The evaluation creation unit 31 extracts the grade information of the tests taken by the students to be evaluated from the test result DB 44, and configures the grade progress item 52 to display the scores, average score, deviation value, and ranking for the first semester, second semester, and current term, respectively.

The correct answer rate item 53 includes a bar graph showing the correct answer rate of each question, the correct answer rate of each question, and the correct answer of each question by the target student. The evaluation creation unit 31 extracts the correct answer rate of each question of the test taken by the student to be evaluated from the test information DB 42. The evaluation creation unit 31 also extracts the correct answer of each question of the student to be evaluated and the questions that can be answered correctly for the test from the test result DB 44. The evaluation creation unit 31 then configures the correct answer rate item 53 to display a bar graph showing the correct answer rate of each question of the test and the correct answer of each question by the student. At this time, the correct answer of each question is represented by "○" if it is a correct answer, and "×" if it is an incorrect answer. In addition, questions that can be answered correctly are represented by "☆", and if there is a question that can be answered correctly among the questions that were answered incorrectly, it is represented by "× → ☆". In the illustrated evaluation result list, it is shown that questions (2) and (5) were answered incorrectly but were questions that could be answered correctly. In this way, by indicating correct answers, incorrect answers, and questions that could be answered correctly with the appropriate marks, teachers and students who are viewing the list of evaluation results can be visually shown which questions the student got wrong on the test and which questions they could have answered correctly.

The evaluation items 54 include evaluations and advice given to students based on the test results. If the information extracted from the test result DB 44 includes questions that can be answered correctly, the evaluation creation unit 31 configures the evaluation items 54 to display a sentence indicating that the questions that can be answered correctly are likely to be answered correctly given the student's academic ability level. For example, the evaluation items 54 may include a sentence such as "Questions marked with a star were answered incorrectly on this test, but with the skills you have, they have a high chance of being answered correctly. Let's start by reviewing the questions marked with a star."

The evaluation creation unit 31 also extracts from the evaluation information DB 46 the revised score, revised standard deviation, and revised ranking, which are the correction information for the test taken by the student to be evaluated, and configures the evaluation item 54 to display a sentence indicating that the information is the correction information if the student answers a question that can be answered correctly. For example, the evaluation item 54 may include a sentence such as "If you answer the question marked with a star correctly, your score will increase by 20 points to 80 points, and your standard deviation will increase by 10 points to 57. Your ranking will increase by 35 places to 23rd. Let's do our best."

In this way, by showing questions that students can answer correctly if they demonstrate their ability as an evaluation of their test results, it is possible to encourage effective review. In addition, by displaying not only actual grades but also the score, deviation value, ranking, etc., for correct answers to questions that can be answered correctly, teachers and students who view the information can clearly see the grades they could achieve if they put in a little more effort, which can increase their motivation to study.

The score distribution item 55 includes a bar graph showing the number of students corresponding to the obtained scores, a mark 72 which is an arrow showing the actual score of the student to be evaluated, and a mark 74 which is an arrow showing the corrected score assuming that the correct answer was given to the question that could be answered correctly. The evaluation creation unit 31 extracts the score information of all students who took the target test from the test result DB 44, and calculates the number of examinees who got scores of 0 to 20 points, 21 to 40 points, 41 to 60 points, 61 to 80 points, and 81 to 100 points. The evaluation creation unit 31 then configures the score distribution item 55 to display a bar graph showing the number of examinees corresponding to the obtained scores, a mark 72 showing the score of the student to be evaluated, and a mark 74 showing the corrected score. For example, if the actual score of the target student is "60 points", a bar graph including "60 points" as the score is displayed by the mark 72, and if the corrected score is "80 points", a bar graph including "80 points" as the score is displayed by the mark 74. In this way, by showing the actual and revised scores with marks on a graph showing the test results, teachers and students viewing the list of evaluation results can be visually shown in an easy-to-understand way what the student's actual grade was and what the grade would have been if they had answered the questions that could have been answered correctly.

In this embodiment, the evaluation result list is structured as shown in FIG. 4, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the structure can be set arbitrarily as long as it can present an evaluation to the student based on the test results. Here, the evaluation of the student based on the test results is an evaluation based on the results of comparing the academic ability level of the target student with the problem level of the questions that make up the test, and is, for example, questions that can be answered correctly, advice to recommend reviewing questions that can be answered correctly, and revised grades assuming that the questions that can be answered correctly are answered correctly.

[Scoring process]
5 is a flowchart of the marking process according to this embodiment. In this process, the management server 20 marks the test for all students who have taken the target test based on the students' entry data D1, and calculates marking result information and grade information for each student. This process is specifically realized by the computer constituting the management server 20 executing a program prepared in advance.

First, the writing device 10 carried by each student acquires the student's writing data D1 and transmits it to the management server 20. The management server 20 receives the writing data D1 (step S10). The management server 20 extracts strokes from the received writing data D1 and performs OCR processing to acquire the answers written by the students. The management server 20 then refers to the answer information included in the test information to determine whether the answers written by the students for each question are correct, and scores the tests performed by each student (step S11).

Next, the management server 20 calculates the test scores of each student and the correct answers for each question based on the test scores, and stores them in the test result DB 44 (step S12). Next, the management server 20 judges whether or not the test scores for all students have been completed (step S13). If it judges that the test scores have not been completed (step S13; No), the management server 20 returns to the processing of step S10. On the other hand, if it judges that the test scores have been completed (step S13; Yes), the management server 20 calculates the average test score, the percentage of correct answers for each question, and other grading result information based on the grading results of all students, and stores them in the test information DB 42 (step S14). In addition, the management server 20 calculates the deviation value, ranking, and other information for each student based on the grading result information and the test scores of each student, and stores them in the test result DB 44 (step S15). This ends the grading process.

[Evaluation Creation Process]
6 is a flowchart of the evaluation creation process according to this embodiment. This process is a process in which the management server 20 creates an evaluation result list showing the test results of each student and the evaluation given to the student according to the test results. This process is specifically realized by the computer constituting the management server 20 executing a program prepared in advance.

First, the management server 20 identifies the academic ability level of the student to be evaluated (step S20). The management server 20 also identifies the problem level of all questions that the student answered incorrectly based on the performance information stored in the test result DB 44 (step S21). The management server 20 then compares the student's academic ability level with the problem level of the questions that the student answered incorrectly, one by one, and determines whether the academic ability level is higher than the problem level (step S22). If it is determined that the academic ability level is higher than the problem level (step S22; Yes), the management server 20 determines that the question was one that the student could answer correctly if he or she demonstrated his or her ability, and identifies the question as a question that can be answered correctly (step S23). The identified questions that can be answered correctly are stored in the evaluation information DB 46. On the other hand, if it is determined that the academic ability level is lower than the question level (step S22; No), the management server 20 determines that the question would be difficult to answer correctly even if the student demonstrated his/her ability, does not identify the question as a question that can be answered correctly, and proceeds to processing in step S24.

Furthermore, the management server 20 judges whether the academic ability level has been compared with the problem level for all questions answered incorrectly (step S24). If it is judged that all questions answered incorrectly have not been compared (step S24; No), the management server 20 returns to the process of step S22 and compares the student's academic ability level with the problem level of questions that have not yet been compared. On the other hand, if it is judged that all questions answered incorrectly have been compared (step S24; Yes), the management server 20 calculates, as correction information, the corrected score, corrected deviation value, and correction rank that would be obtained if the questions that could be answered correctly were answered correctly (step S25). The calculated correction information is stored in the evaluation information DB 46.

Then, based on the information stored in the test information DB 42, the test result DB 44, and the evaluation information DB 46, the management server 20 creates an evaluation result list showing each student's test results and the student's evaluation according to the test results, and transmits this to the teacher terminal 60 as evaluation result list data D2 (step S26). The teacher terminal 60 receives the evaluation result list data D2 from the management server 20, and displays and outputs the evaluation result list. By viewing the evaluation result list, the teacher can not only understand the students' test results, but also recognize review points and correction information when the students demonstrate their abilities without making careless mistakes. It is also possible to print out the evaluation result list and show it to the students. This ends the evaluation creation process.

In this embodiment, the management server 20 transmits the evaluation result list data D2 to the teacher terminal 60, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the evaluation result list data D2 may be transmitted to a terminal device used by the student. In other words, the evaluation result list data D2 can be displayed and output on an arbitrarily set terminal device.

In this way, in this embodiment, the academic level of the student being evaluated is compared with the level of the questions that were answered incorrectly, and an evaluation is automatically created based on the results of the comparison, including advice appropriate to the student's results. This makes it possible to show questions that can be answered correctly if the student demonstrates their ability, and to provide advice that encourages effective review. In addition to the actual grades, correction information for when a question that could be answered correctly is answered correctly can be displayed, allowing the viewers, such as teachers and students, to clearly recognize the grades that could be achieved if they put in a little more effort, which increases their motivation to learn.

[First Modification]
In the above embodiment, when a student takes a test or exercise, the student writes answers on the tablet 10a with a touch pen 10b, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the student may write answers on the test answer sheet with a writing implement such as a pencil or a mechanical pencil. FIG. 7 shows an example of the configuration of the evaluation creation system 200 in this case. In the evaluation creation system 200 according to the first modification, instead of the tablet 10a and the connection device 12, the student side has an answer sheet 6 of the student who took the test and a scanner (optical device) 8. The evaluation creation system 200 is configured so that the scanner 8 provided on the student side, the management server 20, and the teacher terminal 60 provided on the teacher side can communicate with each other via a network 5.

When the scanner 8 performs a reading process on the answered answer sheet 6, the management server 20 receives the scanned image of the answered answer sheet 6 from the scanner 8 via the network 5 as entry data D1. The management server 20 then performs OCR processing on the entry data D1 to obtain the answers entered by the students for each question. The management server 20 executes a marking process and an evaluation creation process based on the answers entered by the students for each question.

[Second Modification]
In the above embodiment and the first modified example, the management server 20 and the teacher terminal 60 are provided independently, but instead, the function of the management server 20 may be included in the teacher terminal 60. FIG. 8 shows an example of the configuration of the evaluation creation system 300 in this case. As shown in the figure, the configuration on the student side is the same as in FIG. 1 and FIG. 7, but the connection device 12 or the scanner 8 transmits the writing data D1 directly to the teacher terminal 60 through the network 5. The test information DB 62, the test result DB 64, and the evaluation information DB 66 are connected to the teacher terminal 60, and the teacher terminal 60 executes the process performed by the management server 20 (corresponding to steps S10 to S15 and S20 to S26 in FIG. 5) to perform grading, and creates and displays a list of evaluation results. In this case, the teacher terminal 60 is an example of the receiving unit, the grading unit, the grade information calculation unit, the comparison unit, the correct answerable question identification unit, the correction information calculation unit, the evaluation creation unit, and the output unit of the present invention.

[Third Modification]
In the above embodiment, the first modification, and the second modification, the management server 20 automatically performs grading, but the present invention is not limited to this, and the teacher may perform grading. For example, when the teacher marks the answer sheet with a writing implement such as a red pen, the scanner 8 performs a reading process on the answered answer sheet 6 after the teacher finishes marking. Then, the management server 20 receives, from the scanner 8 through the network 5, an image obtained by scanning the answered answer sheet 6 on which the teacher has marked the answer, as marking data D1. Also, for example, when the teacher uses a combination of the tablet 10a and the touch pen 10b to mark the answer information entered by the student, the connection device 12 transmits the received marking data D1 to the management server 20 through the network 5 after the teacher finishes marking. That is, the management server 20 receives the marking by the teacher and the answer information entered by the student as marking data D1.

The management server 20 performs OCR processing on the entry data D1 received from the scanner 8 or the connected device 12 to obtain information on the answers entered by the students to each question and the grading information entered by the teacher for each answer to each question. The management server 20 then executes the grading process and the evaluation creation process based on the answers entered by the students to each question and the grading information entered by the teacher for each answer to each question.

5 Network 10 Writing device 10a Tablet 10b Touch pen 12 Connecting device 20 Management server 60 Teacher terminal 100 Evaluation creation system

Claims (8)

An evaluation creation device that creates an evaluation for a student based on the result of a test consisting of a plurality of questions,
A comparison unit that compares an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a problem level indicating the difficulty level of the problem;
an evaluation generating unit that generates an evaluation for the student of the test including a result of the comparison by the comparing unit;
an output unit that outputs the evaluation;
a correctly answerable question identification unit that identifies the question as a correctly answerable question when the academic ability level is higher than the question level as a result of the comparison by the comparison unit;
A receiving unit for receiving input data indicating an answer to the question;
a marking unit that judges the correctness of the answers based on the written data and marks the tests;
a grade information calculation unit that calculates grade information regarding the student's grade in the test based on a grading result by the grading unit;
a correction information calculation unit that calculates correction information regarding the student's performance in the test assuming that the student has answered the correctly answered question correctly;
Equipped with
The comparison unit compares the academic ability level of the student with the problem level of the problem for which the answer was incorrect,
The evaluation creating device , wherein the evaluation includes the correctly answered questions, the performance information, and the correction information . The evaluation generating device according to claim 1 , wherein the evaluation includes a statement indicating that the student has a high possibility of answering the correctly answered question correctly given his/her academic ability level. 3. The evaluation generating device according to claim 1 , wherein the evaluation visually indicates the correctly answered questions by marking. The evaluation generating device according to claim 1 , wherein the evaluation includes a sentence indicating that if the correctly answered question is answered correctly, the student's grade will become the correction information. The evaluation creating device according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the evaluation visually indicates, by one or more of a graph and a mark, that if the correctly answered question is answered correctly, the student's grade will become the correction information. the score information calculation unit calculates the test score of the student based on the grading result;
The correction information calculation unit calculates a corrected score by adding the score of the correctly answered question to the score of the test,
The evaluation generating device according to claim 1 , wherein the evaluation includes the score and the revised score. 1. An assessment creation method executed by an assessment creation device that creates an assessment for a student based on the result of a test consisting of a plurality of questions, comprising:
A comparison process is performed to compare an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a problem level indicating the difficulty level of the problem;
generating an evaluation for the student of the test that includes a result of the comparison from the comparison process ;
Outputting the evaluation;
If the result of the comparison by the comparison process shows that the academic ability level is higher than the question level, the question is identified as a question that can be answered correctly;
receiving entry data indicative of an answer to the question;
Based on the entered data, the correctness of the answer is judged, and the test is scored;
calculating performance information regarding the student's performance on the test based on the grading results;
calculating correction information for the student's performance on the test if the correct answer was given to the correct answer question;
The comparison process compares the academic ability level of the student with the problem level of the problem for which the answer was incorrect,
The evaluation includes the correctly answered question, the performance information, and the correction information . A program executed by an evaluation creation device having a computer and creating an evaluation for a student according to the result of a test consisting of a plurality of questions,
A comparison unit that compares an academic ability level indicating the academic ability of the student with a problem level indicating the difficulty level of the problem;
an evaluation generating unit that generates an evaluation for the student of the test including a result of the comparison by the comparing unit;
an output unit that outputs the evaluation ;
a correctly answerable question identification unit that identifies the question as a correctly answerable question when the academic ability level is higher than the question level as a result of the comparison by the comparison unit;
A receiving unit for receiving input data indicating an answer to the question;
a marking unit that judges the correctness of the answers based on the written data and marks the tests;
a grade information calculation unit that calculates grade information regarding the student's grade in the test based on a grading result by the grading unit;
a correction information calculation unit that calculates correction information regarding the student's performance in the test assuming that the student has answered the correctly answered question correctly;
and causing the computer to function as
The comparison unit compares the academic ability level of the student with the problem level of the problem for which the answer was incorrect,
The program , wherein the evaluation includes the correctly answered questions, the performance information, and the correction information .