Research on holistic Automated Essay Scoring (AES) is long-dated; yet, there is a notable lack of attention for assessing essays according to individual traits. In this work, we propose TRATES, a novel trait-specific and rubric-based cross-prompt AES framework that is generic yet specific to the underlying trait. The framework leverages a Large Language Model (LLM) that utilizes the trait grading rubrics to generate trait-specific features (represented by assessment questions), then assesses those features given an essay. The trait-specific features are eventually combined with generic writing-quality and prompt-specific features to train a simple classical regression model that predicts trait scores of essays from an unseen prompt. Experiments show that TRATES achieves a new state-of-the-art performance across all traits on a widely-used dataset, with the generated LLM-based features being the most significant.

Automated Essay Scoring (AES) has emerged as a significant research problem within natural language processing, providing valuable support for educators in assessing student writing skills. In this paper, we introduce QAES, the first publicly available trait-specific annotations for Arabic AES, built on the Qatari Corpus of Argumentative Writing (QCAW). QAES includes a diverse collection of essays in Arabic, each of them annotated with holistic and trait-specific scores, including relevance, organization, vocabulary, style, development, mechanics, and grammar. In total, it comprises 195 Arabic essays (with lengths ranging from 239 to 806 words) across two distinct argumentative writing tasks. We benchmark our dataset against the state-of-the-art English baselines and a feature-based approach. In addition, we discuss the adopted guidelines and the challenges encountered during the annotation process. Finally, we provide insights into potential areas for improvement and future directions in Arabic AES research.

Although several methods were proposed to address the problem of automated essay scoring (AES) in the last 50 years, there is still much to desire in terms of effectiveness. Large Language Models (LLMs) are transformer-based models that demonstrate extraordinary capabilities on various tasks. In this paper, we test the ability of LLMs, given their powerful linguistic knowledge, to analyze and effectively score written essays. We experimented with two popular LLMs, namely ChatGPT and Llama. We aim to check if these models can do this task and, if so, how their performance is positioned among the state-of-the-art (SOTA) models across two levels, holistically and per individual writing trait. We utilized prompt-engineering tactics in designing four different prompts to bring their maximum potential on this task. Our experiments conducted on the ASAP dataset revealed several interesting observations. First, choosing the right prompt depends highly on the model and nature of the task. Second, the two LLMs exhibited comparable average performance in AES, with a slight advantage for ChatGPT. Finally, despite the performance gap between the two LLMs and SOTA models in terms of predictions, they provide feedback to enhance the quality of the essays, which can potentially help both teachers and students.