KR20200063279A - System and method for testing language - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a linguistic ability evaluation system and an evaluation method using the same and, more specifically, to a linguistic ability evaluation system and an evaluation method using the same which determine whether an answer to a linguistic ability evaluation question is correct, add up language indices of examples which are correct answers of questions with correct answers to calculate language indices by vocabulary/grammar/reading comprehension areas to calculate a personal language index. According to an embodiment of the present invention, the linguistic ability evaluation system comprises: a display unit to output a linguistic ability evaluation question on a screen; an input unit to receive an answer to the linguistic ability evaluation question; a storage unit to store a language index corresponding to examples for the linguistic ability evaluation question; and a control unit to determine whether the received answer is a correct answer, add up correct answer example language indices of questions with correct answers by question areas to calculate language indices by areas, and then use the language indices by areas to calculate a personal language index.

Description

Language ability evaluation system and evaluation method using the same {SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TESTING LANGUAGE}

The present invention relates to a language ability evaluation system and an evaluation method using the same, and more specifically, to determine whether or not a correct answer is given to a language ability evaluation problem, and adds a language index of examples that are correct answers to a problem that is correct answers to vocabulary/grammar/reading The present invention relates to a language ability evaluation system and an evaluation method using the language index for each area and calculating a personal language index through the calculation.

With the recent trend of internationalization, the importance of foreign languages is growing day by day, and accordingly, many people spend a lot of time learning foreign languages.

Students spend a lot of time in English and spend a lot of time and money to get good grades in English during their math skills assessment.

However, there is a statistical result that Korean students spend 10% of their time studying English among OECD countries, while their skills are 10% lower. Various problems such as the standard of the new English score for each school, the memorization of texts from middle school, and the roughness of the SAT English texts are already'Korean English is not English.' The word is now true. What's more, our English admissions policy, which changes every three years, has made parents dependent on academies and has created a mysterious phenomenon that parents are looking for ways to improve their English scores. There is no situation even for the most basic proficiency evaluation to evaluate students' language proficiency, so there is a need to develop a system that can accurately evaluate language proficiency.

Republic of Korea Patent Publication No. 10-2012-0042298 Republic of Korea Registered Patent No. 10-0628983

The technical problem to be achieved by the present invention is to determine whether a correct answer to a language ability assessment problem, and to calculate a language index for each vocabulary/grammar/reading area by summing up the language indexes of the correct answer examples of the correct answer question, through which the individual It is to provide a language ability evaluation system for calculating a language index and an evaluation method using the same.

However, the technical problems to be achieved by the present invention are not limited to the technical problems mentioned above, and other technical problems not mentioned are clearly understood by those skilled in the art from the following description. It could be.

In order to achieve the above object of the present invention, a language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a display unit for outputting a language ability evaluation problem on a screen; An input unit that receives an answer to the language ability evaluation problem; A storage unit for storing a language index corresponding to an example of the language ability evaluation problem; And a controller for determining whether a correct answer is given to the received answer, calculating a language index for each area by summing the language indexes for the correct answer for each problem area, and calculating the personal language index using the language index for each area. It characterized in that it contains a.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the language ability evaluation problem includes individual domains for vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension, and the control unit calculates the language index for each domain, and then the vocabulary domain, the vocabulary domain, and the reading domain respectively The personal language index may be calculated by summing the language indexes for each area according to the importance ratio of.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the storage unit may store a range of individual language indexes that are different for each level of the language proficiency evaluation test and overlap between adjacent levels, a conversion index for each level, and a minimum conversion level for each level.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the control unit sums the correct answer view language index of the correct answer for each problem area, and then displays the correct answer view language index of all questions for each problem area, the conversion index for each level, and the minimum conversion level for each level. The language index for each area can be calculated using the method.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the display unit may sequentially output views for the language ability evaluation problems one by one, so that an answer may be selected from examples for the language ability assessment problem through an input unit.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the control unit determines whether or not a correct answer is given to the input answer, and if the input answer is a correct answer, outputs the next problem having a higher difficulty than the input question through the display unit, If the answer received is incorrect, the next problem may be output through the display unit having a difficulty or similar to that of the question received.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the language ability evaluation method comprises: outputting an example of a language ability evaluation problem and a language ability evaluation problem on a screen; Receiving an answer to the language ability evaluation problem; Determining whether a correct answer is given to the received answer; If the received answer is a correct answer, calculating language indexes for each area by adding language indexes for viewing the correct answers of the correct answers for each question area; And calculating a personal language index by using the language index for each area.

In one embodiment of the present invention, the step of calculating the language index for each area includes summing the correct answer view language index of the correct answer for each problem area, and then viewing the correct answer of the entire problem for each problem area. The language index for each area may be calculated using an index and a minimum conversion level.

In an embodiment of the present invention, the step of calculating the personal language index comprises calculating the language index for each area, and then summing the language index for each area according to the importance ratio of each of the vocabulary area, the phraseology area, and the reading area. The personal language index can be calculated.

The language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention can analyze students by integrating the application score (ARFR) score and Lexile index as well as the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference), which analyzes the test scores by area in the European standard. , ATOS Book Level Analysis as well as American traditional Readability Formulas can be analyzed at once.

In addition, according to the present invention, the language ability evaluation system can analyze domestic indicators used in American students and public schools every year and provide them to domestic learners.

In addition, according to the present invention, the language proficiency evaluation system can provide a large number of data both domestically and abroad to the learner after analysis through a big data analysis algorithm.

In addition, according to the present invention, the language ability evaluation system can accurately evaluate the candidate's fundamental English ability.

1 is a block diagram for explaining a language ability evaluation system related to the present invention.
2 is a diagram showing a personal language index of a problem for each area of each category related to the present invention.
3 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating vocabulary ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.
4 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating grammar ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.
5 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating reading ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.
6 is a view for explaining a method for calculating the entire area PLI in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.
7 is a view for explaining a method of analyzing incorrect answers for each area in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.
8 is a diagram for analyzing the ability of individual questions for each area related to the present invention.
9 is a view for showing an example of using a personal language index for each area related to the present invention.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, the present invention may be implemented in various different forms, and thus is not limited to the embodiments described herein. In addition, in order to clearly describe the present invention in the drawings, parts irrelevant to the description are omitted, and like reference numerals are assigned to similar parts throughout the specification.

Throughout the specification, when a part is "connected (connected, contacted, coupled)" with another part, it is not only * when "directly connected", but also "indirectly" with another member in between. It is also included. Also, when a part “includes” a certain component, this means that other components may be further provided instead of excluding other components, unless otherwise stated.

The terms used herein are only used to describe specific embodiments, and are not intended to limit the present invention. Singular expressions include plural expressions unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. In this specification, the terms "include" or "have" are intended to indicate the presence of features, numbers, steps, actions, components, parts or combinations thereof described herein, one or more other features. It should be understood that the existence or addition possibilities of fields or numbers, steps, operations, components, parts or combinations thereof are not excluded in advance.

1 is a block diagram for explaining a language ability evaluation system related to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 1, the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention may include a user input unit 140, a control unit 110, a storage unit 130, and an output unit 120, By analyzing the language proficiency evaluation data in Korea and abroad, it is possible to provide evaluation results suitable for candidates. In addition, the language ability evaluation system 100 can visualize the candidate's language ability with a number of indicators through the language ability evaluation, and can evaluate reading, grammar, and vocabulary areas. Here, the language may include English as a representative, and is not limited to a specific language, and may include various languages such as Chinese, Japanese, German, French, Spanish, and Arabic. The components shown in FIG. 1 are not essential for implementing the language ability evaluation system 100, and thus the language ability evaluation system 100 described in this specification has more or less components than those listed above. It can have elements.

Looking specifically at each component, the user input unit 140 is for receiving information from the user, when information is input through the user input unit 140, the control unit 110 evaluates the language ability based on the inputted information The operation of the system 100 can be controlled. When a user inputs personal information or an answer to a problem through the user input unit 140 for a problem provided for a user's language ability evaluation, the inputted information is stored in the storage unit 130, and the control unit 110 By checking the correct answer, the user's language ability can be evaluated.

The user input unit 140 may include a keyboard, a mouse, a touch input means, and a mechanical input means (button, dome switch, jog wheel, jog switch, etc.). As an example, the touch-type input means is made of a virtual key, a soft key or a visual key displayed on the touch screen through software processing, or a part other than the touch screen It may be made of a touch key (touch key) disposed on. Meanwhile, the virtual key or the visual key may be displayed on the touch screen while having various forms, for example, a graphic, text, icon, video, or the like. It can be made of a combination of.

The control unit 110 controls the overall operation of the language ability evaluation system 100. For example, the control unit 110 may control the user input unit 140, the storage unit 130, and the output unit 120 by executing programs stored in the storage unit 130.

The control unit 110 controls driving or operation of the language ability evaluation system 100 based on information input by the user input unit 140, or processes data related to an application program installed in the language ability evaluation system 100, A function or operation can be performed through a processor.

For example, the controller 110 may analyze the correct and incorrect answers to the problem and evaluate the user's language ability based on the information input by the user input unit 140.

When the candidate takes the language proficiency test, the controller 110 may analyze the test taker's incorrect answer, the common point and difference between the correct answers, and analyze whether the candidate knows and selects an example for each question accurately or inferred the choice. , Through this, it is possible to show the candidate's exact'basic language skills' as a result.

The control unit 110 may divide the results of the language ability evaluation into several stages, and read and analyze the candidate's language skills in detail for each reading, vocabulary, and method. For example, the results for language proficiency evaluation can be divided into 990 steps.

The controller 110 may include a vocabulary module 111, a grammar module 112, and a reading comprehension module 113 for accurate analysis of language ability evaluation. The controller 110 evaluates each of the candidate's vocabulary ability, grammar ability, and reading ability through each vocabulary/grammar/reading ability evaluation algorithm by the vocabulary module 111, the grammar module 112, and the reading module 113 , The result value evaluated for each module can be added according to the importance ratio of the vocabulary/vocabulary/reading area to calculate the candidate's Personal Language Index (“PLI”). , Personal English Index (“PEI”) can be calculated.

The reading module 113 can be analyzed based on a scale of mathematics ability through a reading algorithm, and it is equipped with a reading comprehension evaluation criterion used in public schools in the United Kingdom and the United States to analyze reading comprehension skills of more stereoscopic candidates.

The grammar module 112 may analyze a total of 13 grammatical domains, such as passive voice, spin-off, and hypothesis, one by one through a grammar algorithm.

The vocabulary module 111 analyzes the vocabulary algorithm by grade level from beginners 1 to 3, and uses knowledge of knowledge as an indicator of TOEIC, TOEFL, SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test), transfer, etc. Spectrum can be analyzed.

The output unit 120 is for outputting an audio signal, a video signal, or a vibration signal, which may include a display unit 121 and an audio output unit 122.

The display unit 121 displays and outputs information processed by the language ability evaluation system 100.

For example, the display unit 121 may display execution screen information of an application program driven by the language ability evaluation system 100, or UI (User Interface) or GUI (Graphic User Interface) information according to the execution screen information. Can be.

The display unit 121 may provide various information about the candidate's language ability. Information about the candidate's language proficiency may include one of various indicators such as national proficiency, Gangnam 3-gu standard proficiency, and US/UK public school standards.

On the other hand, when the display unit 121 and the touch pad are configured as a touch screen in a layer structure, the display unit 121 may be used as an input device in addition to an output device. The display unit 121 includes a liquid crystal display, a thin film transistor-liquid crystal display, an organic light-emitting diode, a flexible display, and a three-dimensional display ( 3D display).

The sound output unit 122 outputs audio data stored in the storage unit 130. In addition, the sound output unit 122 outputs an acoustic signal related to a function (for example, a language ability evaluation test guide, a language ability evaluation time notification sound) performed in the language ability evaluation system 100. The sound output unit 122 may include a speaker, a buzzer, and the like.

The storage unit 130 may store a program for processing and control of the control unit 110 or may store input/output data.

The storage unit 130 includes language proficiency assessment questions, correct answers to language proficiency assessment problems, test takers' answers to language proficiency assessment problems, language metrics for each problem, language metrics for individual words, and individual languages for each specific language, such as English. Indices, individual language index measurement ranges for each category, conversion indexes for each category, minimum values for category conversion, and importance for each vocabulary/grammar/reading area can be stored.

The storage unit 130 may store a total of 120,000 domestic language ability evaluation data and 3 million overseas language ability evaluation data.

The storage unit 130 includes a flash memory type, a hard disk type, a multimedia card micro type, and a card type memory (for example, SD or XD memory), RAM (RAM, Random Access Memory) SRAM (Static Random Access Memory), ROM (ROM, Read-Only Memory), EEPROM (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory), PROM (Programmable Read-Only Memory), magnetic memory, magnetic It may include a storage medium of at least one type of disk, optical disk. In addition, the device may operate a web storage or cloud server that performs a memory storage function on the Internet.

The overall part of the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described.

The language proficiency evaluation system 100 visualizes the candidate's ability for a specific language with a total of 990 indicators, and can evaluate reading, grammar, and vocabulary areas through the language proficiency test. Here, the language may include English as a representative, and is not limited to a specific language, and may include various languages such as Chinese, Japanese, German, French, Spanish, and Arabic.

The language proficiency evaluation is divided into six sections from C0 to C5.'C' is an abbreviation of category, and C5 is the lowest language ability and can be set to increase as the language goes toward C0.

In terms of PLI values, 0~225 PLI can be in C5, 226~360 PLI in C4, 361~540 PLI in C3, 541~720 PLI in C2, 721~845 PLI in C1, and 846~990 PLI in C0. have.

The language proficiency assessment can be classified into a total of six levels, from C0 to C5, by type of test, regardless of whether the candidate takes the test at a level suitable for the candidate's level or takes the test at a higher level, PLI is within the error range. The same can be measured. For example, PLI can be measured equally within the error range of +/-2.1 PLI, whether the candidate is tested in C3 or C2.

Table 1 shows the range of PLI that can be measured in each language proficiency test category.

PLI range that can be measured by language proficiency test category Types of language proficiency test you took Measurable PLI C0 795~990 PLI C1 660~895 PLI C2 450~795 PLI C3 270~630 PLI C4 180~450 PLI C5 0~315 PLI

PLI can be applied to elementary, middle and high school students and language instructors, as well as to all test takers.

In the case of elementary, middle and high school students, you can take the test in the category that suits you, and the criteria can be shown in Table 2.

Category available by grade level grade Ha Heavy medium slander Prize the best Less than 1 second C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 Second 2 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C4 Candle 3 C5 C5 C5 C4 C4 C4 Candle 4 C5 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 Candle 5 C5 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 Candle 6 C4 C4 C4 C3 C3 C3 Middle 1 C4 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 Medium 2 C4 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 Middle 3 C3 C3 C3 C2 C2 C2 High 1 C3 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 High 2 C3 C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 High 3 C3 C2 C2 C2 C1 C1 N Aquatic ^{One )} C5 C4 C3 C2 C2 C1

1) N students are those who have taken the Nth grade in the college entrance exam, except for the third year of high school.

In the language ability assessment, the number of problems in reading, grammar, and vocabulary areas for each category can be expressed as shown in Table 3.

Number of problems by category/area category Reading comprehension Number of grammar questions Vocabulary items Total number of problems C0 30 0 15 45 C1 25 10 10 45 C2 17 18 10 45 C3 17 18 10 45 C4 18 11 16 45 C5 18 11 16 45

The language ability assessment may include 18 to 30 reading areas, 0 to 18 grammar areas, and 10 to 16 questions for vocabulary areas, and the total number of questions may be 45.

The algorithm of the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described.

In the language proficiency assessment, examples that constitute individual problems may contain important meanings in their content and location.

For example, a total of five examples of the grammar questions 1 to 5 can evaluate whether you know the knowledge of to infinitive, tense, and number matching. The language proficiency evaluation system 100 may allow a candidate to make a total of five decisions to solve a problem. For five decisions, you can show the whole view one at a time rather than the entire view at once. If you solve a total of 45 questions, you can assess the candidate's language skills through 225 correct and incorrect decisions.

The language proficiency test can be presented in the order of problems in the vocabulary area from C0 to C5, problems in the grammar area, and problems in the reading area, and can be assigned a low number from a relatively easy problem. The language proficiency test can solve the easy questions presented by category, and if the correct answer is given, the question with high difficulty can be presented to the candidate.

Vocabulary/Language/Reading The questions in each area can be designed for each question and example considering the type of problem, the difficulty of the question, the level of incorrect answers, and the intention to ask questions. The language ability evaluation system 100 may evaluate the detailed language skills of the candidate by analyzing the PLI for each example of the problem according to the candidate's selection result for the designed problem.

If the candidate selects the wrong view, the candidate's vulnerability can be analyzed by option, and if the candidate selects the correct answer, the candidate's knowledge level by option can be analyzed.

The language ability evaluation system 100 may determine the PLI for each question before the candidate takes the test. The PLI for each given question can be limited so that it can be changed by the evaluator in the C0 test, but not in the test except the C0 test.

PLI for each of the predetermined problems may be determined for individual problems for each category as shown in FIG. 2, and may be arranged in order from low PLI to high PLI for each region.

3 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating vocabulary ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 3, a method of evaluating vocabulary ability of the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention includes leveling a word (S301); Presenting a vocabulary problem (S302); Receiving an answer of a vocabulary problem (S303); Checking whether the input answer is correct (S304); If the entered answer is a correct answer, displaying a question type and a correct answer (S305); If the entered answer is incorrect, displaying the question type and incorrect answer (S306); And it may include the step (S307) of checking for the presence or absence of the next problem.

Step S301 may be a process of dividing most words existing in the world for a specific language into a predetermined level. In the case of English, the vocabulary module 111 may divide approximately 110,000 English words into 990 PLIs, and store PLI values for individual words in the storage unit 130. For example, in English, the level of PEI of'old' is 233, and that of'obsolete', which is the same meaning, is 771. Newly added or missing words can be further divided into PLI and saved.

Step S302 may be a process of selecting a type of vocabulary question, designing a vocabulary question, and constructing an example including a correct answer. The vocabulary module 111 may select a problem type from among 16 types of vocabulary problems and present a problem. Types of vocabulary problems can include simple English words, synonyms, antonyms, and sentence completion. In C4 and C5, the problem type can be designed so that all types are evenly answered one by one, and simple types may be omitted in high-level tests such as C0 and C1. The vocabulary module 111 can further reflect the variables such as problem difficulty, incorrect answer level, and question purpose, and the problem difficulty, incorrect answer level, and question purpose can be presented before the problem is presented. However, it can be defined in advance by the submitting institution, submitter, and candidates.

In step S303, the candidate may select a view that is identified as the correct answer from the view of the problem through the user input unit 140. Through the user input unit 140, the candidate can select a view that is determined to be the correct answer from a total of five views.

Step S304 may be a process of determining whether the answer entered by the candidate is the correct answer to the problem through the vocabulary module 111.

If the answer entered by the test taker is the correct answer, the vocabulary module 111 may mark the type of the problem corresponding to the problem as the correct answer and the correct answer to the problem (S305). The type of the problem marked as the correct answer and the PLI value of the example that is the correct answer may be stored in the storage unit 130. The PLI of the vocabulary region may be calculated through a PLI conversion method using the PLI value of the example, which is the correct answer of the question indicated as the correct answer.

If the answer entered by the candidate is incorrect, the vocabulary module 111 may mark the type of the problem corresponding to the problem that is incorrect and the incorrect answer to the problem (S306). The storage 130 may store the type of the problem marked as incorrect, the PLI value of the correct answer view, and the summed PLI values of the views excluding the correct answer view.

In step S307, the presence or absence of the next problem is checked, and if there is a next problem, the step S202 may be repeated and the vocabulary question may be repeated, and if there is no next problem, the vocabulary ability evaluation may be ended.

4 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating grammar ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Referring to Figure, a method for evaluating grammar skills of the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention includes the steps of presenting a grammar problem (S401); Receiving an answer of a grammar problem (S402); Checking whether the correct answer is input (S403); If the entered answer is a correct answer, displaying a question type and a correct answer (S404); If the entered answer is incorrect, displaying the question type and incorrect answer (S405); And it may include the step of confirming the presence or absence of the next problem (S406).

The grammar module 112 may check the knowledge spectrum of test takers for each grammar area that can be seen through each view as well as PLI for each problem and view. For example, since the problem is simply a matter of classifying the same name, if it is wrong, it is possible to classify that the person does not know the name and hopefully knows the name of the same name. However, the language ability evaluation system 100 can analyze the test taker's ability out of the simple classification.

The grammar module 112 may present a grammar problem by combining a grammar area and a problem type (S401). The grammar module 112 may determine whether a candidate can recognize grammars of different domains by adding grammars of different areas to the case of a question asking the question of the infinitive and the same noun. Grammar problems can consist of about 10 to 18 questions, and each problem can be composed of different types.

Table 4 shows the grammatical domain of the grammar problem and the type of problem.

Grammar areas and problem types for grammar problems Questionnaire Grammar area (18) Problem types (15) One. Sentence Structure sentence structure Description by type 2. Verbs & Sentence Patterns Verbs & Sentence Formats Choosing the right context 3. Tenses tense Choosing grammatically wrong sentences 4. Auxiliary Verbs Number of grammatically incorrect sentences 5. Subjunctive Mood Family Law Fill in the blanks-by word type 6. Passive Voice Passive Fill in the blank-syntax 7. Infinitives infinitive Paraphrasing 8. Gerunds Which is correct in the language? 9. Participles spraying What do the sentences mean? 10. Prepositions Different from the meaning indicated by the following underscore
What? 11. Conjunctions conjunctions Find phrases used in phraseology 12. Relatives affiliates Find each suitable expression 13. InversionㆍEmphasisㆍEllipsis, etc. Special syntax What is the proper way of expression on the underline? 14. Agreement & Direct and Reported Speech Find negative grammar by context 15. Nouns & Articles Nouns and articles Find grammatical elements in the next article 16. Pronouns pronoun 17. Adjectives & Adverbs Adjectives and Adverbs 18. Comparison ratio

The composition of grammar problems may be randomly presented as a pair of grammar domains and problem types, and PLI may be calculated in the same order as the vocabulary module 111 above.

The grammar module 112 may receive an input through which the candidate selects a view determined to be the correct answer from among examples of questions through the user input unit 140 in operation S402. Through the user input unit 140, the candidate can select a view that is determined to be the correct answer from a total of five views.

Whether the answer entered by the candidate is the correct answer may be determined through the grammar module 112 (S403).

If the answer entered by the candidate is the correct answer, the grammar module 112 may mark the type of the problem corresponding to the problem as the correct answer and the correct answer to the problem (S404). The type of the problem marked as the correct answer and the PLI value of the example that is the correct answer may be stored in the storage unit 130. The PLI of the grammatical domain can be calculated using the PLI conversion method using the PLI value of the example, which is the correct answer of the question indicated as the correct answer.

If the answer entered by the test taker is incorrect, the grammar module 112 may mark a problem type corresponding to a problem that is an incorrect answer and an incorrect answer to the problem (S405). The storage 130 may store the type of the problem marked as incorrect, the PLI value of the correct answer view, and the summed PLI values of the views excluding the correct answer view.

In step S406, the presence or absence of the next problem may be checked, and if there is a next problem, the question may be repeated in step S401, and the grammar ability evaluation may be ended if there is no next problem.

The grammar module 112 analyzes each wrong and correct grammar type one by one to analyze the grammar type difficult or familiar to the test taker.

One grammar problem represents five examples, and each example can represent a different type of grammar. Candidates can solve grammar and decide whether they are correct or wrong for a total of six types of phrases. For example, if there are 18 problems, you can get the same effect as solving a total of 108 grammar problems. Each grammar type can come out a total of six times, and it can be calculated by converting the candidate's grammar knowledge level into 100%.

5 is a view for explaining a method for evaluating reading ability in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

5, a method of evaluating a reading ability of the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention includes the steps of presenting a reading problem (S501); Receiving an answer to a reading problem (S502); Checking whether the correct answer is input (S503); If the entered answer is a correct answer, displaying a question type and a correct answer (S504); If the entered answer is incorrect, displaying the question type and incorrect answer (S505); And it may include the step (S506) of checking for the presence or absence of the next problem.

In the reading module 113, all problems in the reading area can be converted into a PLI in the fingerprint in the problem. Difficult fingerprint problems can be designed with a high PLI, whereas easy problems can be designed with a low PLI. The reading module 113 may calculate the PLI of the fingerprint by comprehensively analyzing the length of the fingerprint, the number of conjunctions and affiliates used in one sentence, the use of the preposition, and the word difficulty analysis used.

For example, the PLI of a fingerprint can be calculated as follows.

Fingerprint PLI = Number of sentences used x sum of conjunctions and affiliates used x number of prepositions / average number of words used in prepositional phrases x Adjusted value

Here, the adjustment value may be a value that sets the PLI value of the fingerprint to be adjusted as the PLI value of the fingerprint vocabulary, and preferably has a value of 1.1 to 5.

For each category, each PLI may be determined in the process of designing a problem, and the reading problem may be presented with a fingerprint configured according to each designated PLI (S501).

There are a total of 22 types of problems used in reading comprehension, and you can evaluate candidates using a total of 9 types of domestic credit and SAT, 8 types of American public schools and SAT, and 5 types of British public schools, randomly for each category.

Each type of reading comprehension can be represented in Table 5 below.

Types of reading problems Korean test type U.S. Test Type British Test Type Find a match Paraphrasing (sentence variation) Latin sentence analysis Finding discrepancies Comprehensive Accident Match Create sentences that fit the flow Blank reasoning Newspaper, editorial match Fact check type Find a topic Literature analysis Find an overview Classification Classical literature analysis Outline Foundation Find well-written articles Finding the atmosphere of writing Finding inappropriate conversations Find the topic of the article Find the topic of your next post Palm print summary Find sentences that cannot be converted to listening Find sentences that don't fit the flow

The difficulty of reading comprehension can be configured according to a predetermined PLI.

The reading module 113 may receive an input through which the candidate selects a view determined to be the correct answer from among examples of questions through the user input unit 140 in operation S502. Through the user input unit 140, the candidate can select a view that is determined to be the correct answer from a total of five views.

Whether or not the answer entered by the candidate is the correct answer may be determined through the reading module 113 (S503).

If the answer entered by the test taker is the correct answer, the reading module 113 may mark the type of the problem corresponding to the problem as the correct answer and the correct answer to the problem (S504). The type of the problem marked as the correct answer and the PLI value of the example that is the correct answer may be stored in the storage unit 130. The PLI value of the reading area can be calculated using the PLI conversion method using the PLI value of the example, which is the correct answer of the question indicated as the correct answer.

If the answer entered by the test taker is incorrect, the reading module 113 may mark a problem type corresponding to a problem that is an incorrect answer and an incorrect answer to the problem (S505). The storage 130 may store the type of the problem marked as incorrect, the PLI value of the correct answer view, and the summed PLI values of the views excluding the correct answer view.

In step S506, the presence or absence of the next problem may be checked, and if there is a next problem, the question may be repeated in step S501, and the reading ability evaluation may be ended if there is no next problem.

6 is a view for explaining a method for calculating the entire area PLI in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 6, the method for calculating the PLI for each area in the language ability evaluation system 100 according to an embodiment includes: calculating a PLI for a view of a correct answer item for a problem in which a candidate answered the correct answer (S701); Summing the PLIs of the correct answer questions (S702); Calculating PLI for each region (S703); And calculating the entire region PLI (S704).

The language ability evaluation system may calculate a PLI of an example that is a correct answer for each area of vocabulary/grammar/reading for a problem marked as correct. The PLI value of the correct answer example may be determined before the candidate takes the test, and the range of the PLI value of the individual example may be set from 0 to 990. The vocabulary module 111 may sum the PLI of all questions processed by the candidate as the correct answer for each area.

The PLI summed for each area can be divided by the total PLI value for each area and multiplied by the conversion index for each category. Here, the total PLI for each area may be determined before the test taker, and the conversion index for each category may be a number indicating the average difficulty level per test PLI corresponding to each category.

The conversion index for each category may be an absolute value for each question sheet selected based on 100,000 data. The PLI for each region may be calculated by adding the minimum value of the category conversion to the value multiplied by the conversion index for each category.

The minimum conversion value for each category may be a minimum value that is determined to be correct when a candidate takes a test of a lower level category. The minimum conversion value for each category can be changed according to the rounds of the language proficiency test, and the range that varies for each round can be increased or decreased by using the cumulative data of the test.

Therefore, the PLI for each area can be expressed by the following equation.

The PLI calculated for each area may calculate the entire area PLI according to the importance ratio of vocabulary/vocabulary/reading by category.

Therefore, the entire region PLI can be expressed by the following equation.

The importance ratio of vocabulary/grammar/reading by category may be determined differently because the areas of importance are different for each language proficiency test, and may be a value determined by the candidate before taking the exam.

Table 6 shows an example of calculating PLI for individual areas and all areas of a category C1 test.

Example CLI test PLI calculation (Unit: PLI) category C1 PLIT measuring range 630~895 Total PLI value 265 1 p% PLI value 2.65 By area Perfect score Category Conversion Index Category conversion minimum importance Vocabulary (V/C) 7425 265 630 3 Grammar (G/R) 7825 265 630 2 Reading Comprehension (R/C) 15100 265 630 5

For the category C1, the PLI measurement range is 630 to 895, the perfect score for each area is lexical 7,425, grammar 7,825, reading 15,100, and the importance for each area is lexical 3, grammar 2, reading 5. Here, the perfect score for each area may be a sum of all PLI values of the correct answer for each area.

In the case of category C1, the conversion index for each category is 265, and the minimum value for category conversion can be determined before the test. If the sum of the PLIs determined as correct answers for each area is 4,455 vocabulary, 6,260 grammar, and 6,040 reading, respectively, the PLI for each area is as follows.

The entire area PLI can be calculated as follows.

PLI for individual and total areas of the categories C2, C3, C4, and C5 tests can also be calculated using the PLI measurement range, area perfect score, and importance of each area given in Table 7 below.

Category C2 test PLI calculation example (Unit: PLI) category C2 PLIT measuring range 450~795 Total PLI value 345 1 p% PLI value 3.45 By area Perfect score Category Conversion Index Category conversion minimum importance Vocabulary (V/C) 6075 345 450 2 Grammar (G/R) 11160 345 450 3 Reading Comprehension (R/C) 10795 345 450 5

Category C3 test PLI calculation example (Unit: PLI) category C3 PLIT measuring range 225~630 Total PLI value 405 1 p% PLI value 4.05 By area Perfect score Category Conversion Index Category conversion minimum importance Vocabulary (V/C) 4950 405 225 2 Grammar (G/R) 8775 405 225 3 Reading Comprehension (R/C) 8670 405 225 5

Category C4 test PLI calculation example (Unit: PLI) category C4 PLIT measuring range 0-450 Total PLI value 270 1 p% PLI value 2.7 By area Perfect score Category Conversion Index Category conversion minimum importance Vocabulary (V/C) 4680 270 0 3 Grammar (G/R) 3355 270 0 3 Reading Comprehension (R/C) 5805 270 0 4

Category C5 test PLI calculation example (Unit: PLI) category C5 PLIT measuring range 90~315 Total PLI value 225 1 p% PLI value 2.25 By area Perfect score Category Conversion Index Category conversion minimum importance Vocabulary (V/C) 3240 225 90 5 Grammar (G/R) 2740 225 90 2 Reading Comprehension (R/C) 4500 225 90 3

7 is a view for explaining a method of analyzing incorrect answers for each area in the language ability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 7, the language ability evaluation system 100 may analyze an incorrect answer for each area when the candidate indicates an incorrect answer rather than the correct answer through the control unit 110.

Incorrect answer analysis may be an analysis of an example marked as an answer from a problem marked as an incorrect answer by a candidate. For example, if the correct answer is 3, which is a synonym, and 2nd antonym is selected as the correct answer, an incorrect answer analysis may be performed.

The method of analyzing the incorrect answer includes calculating a sum of example PLIs excluding correct answers for each area (S701); Dividing the PLI of the correct answer by the calculated PLI sum to calculate the PLI-based difficulty of the problem (S702); And it may include the step of calculating the analysis result for each type of region (S703).

In step S702, the PLI-based difficulty of the problem may be a more difficult problem.

Step S703 is a step of analyzing the core type for each view; Multiplying the PLI-based difficulty by the wrong number of problems and dividing the value divided by the conversion index by category into the importance of each area; Obtaining a logarithmic value after adding the result divided by the importance of each area by squaring the candidate's correct answer-based PLI value; And calculating a PLI value for each test taker's area, to calculate an analysis result for each area/type for an incorrect answer.

8 is a diagram for analyzing the ability of individual questions for each area related to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 8, the language proficiency evaluation system 100 may score (PLI) incorrect answers/correct answers for individual problems by point tools for each indicator after the candidate takes the language ability evaluation.

The language proficiency evaluation system 100 may present a problem to the candidate based on a predefined type of problem, a difficulty level, an incorrect answer level, and a purpose of the question. When presenting a problem, you can show the whole view of the problem at a time or one view sequentially. Individual views of the problem may have predetermined PLI values. The language proficiency evaluation system 100 may determine whether a correct answer is from an answer indicated by the candidate and analyze the strength of the correct answer and vulnerability of the incorrect answer. The language proficiency evaluation system 100 can show whether a student is doing well or not in the same group by imposing points for each analysis index. When the analysis of one problem is completed, the scored data for the problem may be stored in the storage unit 130 and scoring may be performed for the next problem.

9 is a view for showing an example of using a personal language index for each area related to the present invention.

Referring to FIG. 9, the PLI data calculated by the language proficiency evaluation system 100 may be analyzed by grouping it into several categories in combination with US public students' score data and UK CEFR standard data.

Data analyzed by category can be analyzed through a self-analysis big data program called'PLI Total Big Data', which is one big data, and various result reports can be derived. The language proficiency evaluation system 100 can show a candidate's comprehensive analysis index and specific proficiency analysis results of reading, grammar, and vocabulary through a report composed of a total of six pages of language skills analysis.

The method according to an embodiment of the present invention is implemented in the form of program instructions that can be executed through various computer means and can be recorded on a computer-readable medium. Computer-readable media may include program instructions, data files, data structures, or the like alone or in combination. The program instructions recorded on the medium may be specially designed and constructed for the present invention, or may be known and usable by those skilled in computer software. Examples of computer-readable recording media include magnetic media such as hard disks, floppy disks, and magnetic tapes, optical media such as CD-ROMs, DVDs, and magnetic media such as floptical disks. -Hardware devices specifically configured to store and execute program instructions such as magneto-optical media, and ROM, RAM, flash memory, and the like. Examples of program instructions include high-level language code that can be executed by a computer using an interpreter, etc., as well as machine language codes produced by a compiler. The hardware device described above may be configured to operate as one or more software modules to perform the operation of the present invention, and vice versa.

The above description of the present invention is for illustration only, and a person having ordinary knowledge in the technical field to which the present invention pertains can understand that it can be easily modified to other specific forms without changing the technical spirit or essential features of the present invention. will be. Therefore, it should be understood that the embodiments described above are illustrative in all respects and not restrictive. For example, each component described as a single type may be implemented in a distributed manner, and similarly, components described as distributed may be implemented in a combined form.

The scope of the present invention is indicated by the following claims, and all modifications or variations derived from the meaning and scope of the claims and their equivalent concepts should be interpreted to be included in the scope of the present invention.

100: language ability evaluation system
110: control unit
111: Vocabulary module
112: grammar module
113: reading module
120: output unit
121: display unit
122: sound output unit
130: storage unit
140: user input

Claims (9)

A display unit that outputs a language ability evaluation problem on a screen;
An input unit that receives an answer to the language ability evaluation problem;
A storage unit for storing a language index corresponding to an example of the language ability evaluation problem; And
A control unit for determining whether a correct answer is given to the received answer, calculating a language index for each area by adding a language index for a correct answer for each problem area, and calculating a personal language index using the language index for each area;
Language evaluation system characterized in that it comprises a.
According to claim 1,
The language ability assessment problem includes individual areas for vocabulary, grammar and reading comprehension,
The control unit,
After calculating the language index for each area, the language ability evaluation system characterized by calculating the personal language index by adding the language index for each area according to the importance ratio of each of the vocabulary area, the grammar area, and the reading area.
According to claim 1,
The storage unit,
A language ability evaluation system characterized by storing a range of individual language indices which are different for each level of the language proficiency test and overlapping between adjacent levels, and a minimum conversion value for each level.
According to claim 3,
The control unit,
After summing the correct answer view language index of the correct answer for each problem area, calculating the language index for each area by using the language index, the conversion index for each level, and the minimum conversion value for each level for each problem area. Language ability evaluation system.
According to claim 1,
The display unit,
A language ability evaluation system characterized in that the views for the language ability evaluation problems are sequentially output one by one so that an answer can be selected from among examples of the language ability assessment problem through the input unit.
According to claim 1,
The control unit,
It determines whether a correct answer is given to the input answer, and if the input answer is a correct answer, outputs the next question having a higher difficulty than the input question through the display unit. If the input answer is incorrect, the answer is input. A language ability evaluation system characterized in that the next problem having a difficulty level or similar to the problem is output through the display unit.
Displaying an example of the language ability evaluation problem and the language ability evaluation problem on a screen;
Receiving an answer to the language ability evaluation problem;
Determining whether a correct answer is given to the received answer;
If the received answer is a correct answer, calculating a language index for each area by summing the language indexes for viewing the correct answer of the correct answer for each problem area; And
Calculating a personal language index using the language index for each area;
Method for evaluating language ability, comprising a.
The method of claim 7,
The step of calculating the language index for each area may include:
After summing the correct answer view language index of the correct answer for each problem area, calculating the language index for each area by using the language index, the conversion index for each level, and the minimum conversion value for each level for each problem area. How to assess language skills.
The method of claim 7,
The step of calculating the personal language index,
After calculating the language index for each area, the language ability evaluation method for calculating the personal language index by summing the language index for each area according to the importance ratio of each of the vocabulary area, the language area, and the reading area.

Images