arXiv:2504.02323v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have created new opportunities to assist teachers and support student learning. While researchers have explored variou...
arXiv:2608. 12351v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has challenged the validity of unsupervised online assessment, especially in technical subjects where plausible answers can be produced with little effort.
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.
High-stakes English proficiency tests treat standardized, unaided performance as evidence for score interpretations about academic English proficiency. This interpretation remains meaningful, but as target language use domains increasingly involve generative AI, the extrapolation from unaided test performance to academic communicative readiness becomes less self-evident.
arXiv:2509.05346v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being adopted to support personalized learning, there remains limited understanding of how thei...
The paper introduces a prompt‑engineering framework that personalizes large language model (LLM) teaching assistants across disciplines by tailoring responses to six learner‑specific dimensions, creating 96 distinct learner profiles. It also analyzes student queries through Bloom’s Taxonomy to gauge cognitive complexity, encoding both learner attributes and cognitive assessments into structured prompts that condition the LLM without retraining. Experiments using NLP metrics and a small human study demonstrate that this approach yields perceptible differences in response style and structure, with statistical evidence linking specific learner attributes to measurable changes.
arXiv:2608. 11625v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Feedback processes strongly influence student learning, yet their educational value depends on addressing two distinct challenges: providing high-quality, timely, and individualised feedback at scale, and supporting students to interpret, evaluate, and act on that feedback productively.
arXiv:2606. 05983v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative AI makes answers easy and understanding hard, and uncritical use invites cognitive offloading.
arXiv:2608. 16016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) can produce high-quality essays, code, and design artefacts, challenging the validity of conventional assessments that rely on single-point submissions and product-only grading.
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.
Feedback processes strongly influence student learning, yet their educational value depends on addressing two distinct challenges: providing high-quality, timely, and individualised feedback at scale, and supporting students to interpret, evaluate, and act on that feedback productively. Generative AI offers a credible means of addressing the provision challenge, but students' uptake of AI-generated feedback remains limited.
arXiv:2608. 11625v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Feedback processes strongly influence student learning, yet their educational value depends on addressing two distinct challenges: providing high-quality, timely, and individualised feedback at scale, and supporting students to interpret, evaluate, and act on that feedback productively.