arXiv:2606. 08400v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Graduate-level research reading report assessment creates a substantial labor burden for educators.
arXiv:2606. 12422v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The integration of large language models (LLMs) into educational assessment represents a transformative shift in classroom grading practices.
arXiv:2606. 17507v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative AI and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to question generation and automated assessment.
arXiv:2609.36073v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) in the context of education has introduced significant challenges in enforcement of academic...
arXiv:2606. 06546v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) for education requires measuring how models teach, not only what they know.
The paper introduces a human‑in‑the‑loop framework for AI‑assisted scoring of short written responses in a large‑scale national assessment. Using data from two recent test editions with about 5,000 responses each, the study validates that AI-generated scores align moderately to highly with human raters across multiple rubric dimensions. The framework also identifies when human review is most needed, allowing more efficient allocation of expert effort while maintaining assessment quality.
arXiv:2606. 24973v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We introduce a dataset of 32,534 double-marked real student responses to GCSE mock exams (GCSEs are the UK's national exams, taken at age ~16), spanning 328 questions across five subjects and including handwritten work.
The paper introduces a human‑in‑the‑loop framework for AI‑assisted scoring of short written responses in a large‑scale national assessment. Using data from two recent test editions with about 5,000 student responses each, the authors validate that AI‑generated scores align moderately to highly with human raters across multiple rubric dimensions. The framework includes a correction workflow that flags cases needing human review, thereby reducing manual workload while maintaining assessment quality.
arXiv:2601.08654v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Rubric-based text evaluation increasingly relies on large language models (LLMs) as scalable judges, yet frozen black-box models can interpret the...
arXiv:2606. 10254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved near-perfect performance in \emph{solving} high-school mathematics, their ability to \emph{evaluate} the diverse reasoning processes of real human students remains under-examined.
arXiv:2606. 24839v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic data analysis systems produce rich outputs, including code, numerical results, and verbal diagnostics.
The study evaluates large language model (LLM) graders on two computer‑science exams, testing 171 configurations of closed‑ and open‑weights models. While the best LLM configuration achieved a mean absolute error of 1.64/35—better than the 2.61/35 error between two human graders—its performance was highly sensitive to the prompt. A short "strict grader" preamble caused most open‑weight models to exceed acceptable error thresholds or stop grading entirely, whereas fine‑tuning with a single LoRA adapter restored parity with human graders and reduced sensitivity to harsh prompts.
arXiv:2606. 11477v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Correcting handwritten exams by hand is time-consuming and error-prone, particularly for large cohorts, while fully digital exams tend to force a didactic narrowing towards closed question formats.