Latest papers
46 papers3 papers in the last four weeks, down 57% on the four weeks before. 0.0% of all new papers.
Chatbots have long been explored as tools to support learning, and recent advances in large language models have significantly expanded the availability of platforms for educators to author AI tutoring chatbots. Yet effective authorship demands more than writing a system prompt; it requires educators to act as learning designers, AI interaction designers, and QA engineers. In practice, however, teachers rarely fulfill these roles. Our formative study found that virtually none systematically tested their bots before deploying them to students. To address this gap, we present PromptDecipher, a system that restructures the authoring workflow around a direct correction-based interaction rather than writing abstract system prompts, teachers interact with a live chat preview and edit undesirable bot responses. An automated pipeline then analyzes the correction, proposes a targeted system prompt rewrite, and validates the change across pre-defined test scenarios. This enforces QA as a first-class activity and scaffolds teachers in roles they would otherwise skip. PromptDecipher will be deployed in an AI for Educators course enrolling hundreds of higher-education instructors. A live prototype (https://teacher-prompting.vercel.app/), an anonymized codebase (https://anonymous.4open.science/r/teacher-prompting-2EDF/), and anonymized demo (https://tinyurl.com/las-prompt-decipher-demo) are available via links in the footnote.
Are Agents Ready to Teach? A Multi-Stage Benchmark for Real-World Teaching Workflows
Language agents are increasingly deployed in professional workflows, yet tutoring remains a high-stakes capability that existing evaluations only partially capture. Effective tutor agents require more than producing correct answers or executing accurate tool calls: they must infer a warranted teaching decision from evidence, adapt support as learner state changes, and carry an instructor's request through a learning-management system (LMS) to a completed, verified intervention. We introduce TeachArena, a source-grounded benchmark that jointly evaluates three complementary surfaces of teaching work: professional pedagogical judgment, situated multi-turn tutoring, and end-to-end LMS teaching workflows. Its 354 audited tasks are each built around a pedagogical insight, grounded in evidence, and evaluated with matched verifiers over observable turn-level responses, tutoring trajectories, and persistent artifacts or environment states. Across a comprehensive evaluation of frontier models, our findings reveal that current models are generally capable of bounded pedagogical judgment, but still fall short of professional teaching standards in situated tutoring and end-to-end teaching-workflow execution. By unifying teacher judgment, adaptive tutoring, and institutional action in one auditable benchmark, TEACHARENA provides a measurement foundation for developing tutor agents that can support realistic teaching work.
K12-KGraph: A Curriculum-Aligned Knowledge Graph for Benchmarking and Training Educational LLMs
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in K-12 education, yet existing benchmarks such as C-Eval, CMMLU, GaokaoBench, and EduEval mainly evaluate factual recall through exam-style question answering. Effective educational AI additionally requires curriculum cognition: understanding how knowledge is structured through prerequisite chains, concept taxonomies, experiment-concept links, and pedagogical sequencing. To address this gap, we introduce K12-KGraph, a curriculum-aligned knowledge graph extracted from official People's Education Press textbooks across mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology from primary to high school. The graph contains seven node types (Concept, Skill, Experiment, Exercise, Section, Chapter, Book) and nine relation types covering taxonomy, prerequisite, association, verification, assessment, location, and order. Based on this graph, we construct two resources: (1) K12-Bench, a 23,640-question multi-select benchmark spanning five graph-derived task families (Ground, Prereq, Neighbor, Evidence, and Locate); and (2) K12-Train, a KG-guided supervised fine-tuning corpus of approximately 2,300 QA pairs synthesized from graph structure and node attributes. Experiments reveal substantial deficiencies in curriculum cognition: on K12-Bench, Gemini-3-Flash achieves only 57% exact match, while the best open-source model, Gemma-4-31B-IT, reaches 46%. Under a strictly matched 2,300-sample SFT budget on Qwen3-4B-Base and Llama-3.1-8B-Base, K12-Train consistently outperforms equally sized subsets from eight mainstream instruction-tuning corpora on both GaokaoBench and EduEval, demonstrating that curriculum-structured supervision is highly sample-efficient for educational tuning. We release the graph, benchmark, training data, and full construction pipeline.
Quality-Conditioned Agreement in Automated Short Answer Scoring: Mid-Range Degradation and the Impact of Task-Specific Adaptation
Automated short answer scoring (ASAS) is shifting from discriminative, fine-tuned models to large language models (LLMs) used in few-shot settings. This paradigm leverages LLMs broad world knowledge and ease of deployment, but limited task-specific data may reduce alignment on complex scoring tasks. In particular, its impact on scoring partially correct responses that require nuanced interpretation remains underexplored. We investigate the relationship between the degree of task-specific adaptation of different models and quality-conditioned scoring agreement. We compare three LLMs (GPT-5.2, GPT-4o, Claude Opus 4.5) in few-shot mode, a fine-tuned BERT-based encoder, and a human expert on two open-ended biology items, using several hundred student responses and ground truth scores provided by a biology education expert. The results show that human-human agreement is highest and stable across the full quality spectrum. All AI models perform well on fully correct and fully incorrect responses, but exhibit substantial degradation on mid-range responses. This mid-range degradation is conditioned on task-specific adaptation: It is most severe in few-shot LLMs with few examples and decreases as task-specific data increases, with fine-tuned encoder models performing best. This mid-range degradation may lead to inequitable evaluation of responses produced by students with developing understanding. Our findings highlight the importance of quality-conditioned fairness, with particular attention to mid-range responses.
The Nonverbal Syntax Framework: An Evidence-Based Tiered System for Inferring Learner States from Observable Behavioral Cues
Understanding learners' cognitive and affective states underpins adaptive educational systems and effective teaching. Although research links nonverbal cues to internal states, no framework calibrates them to evidence. We present the Nonverbal Syntax Framework, drawn from a systematic review of 908 studies and 17,043 cue-state mappings (Turaev et al., 2026). The framework addresses three challenges: terminological fragmentation (behaviors described inconsistently), evidence heterogeneity (single observations to replicated findings), and state ambiguity (similar patterns indicating multiple states). Normalization consolidated 5,537 state labels into 2,010 canonical states (63.7%) and 11,521 cues into 6,434 normalized cues (44.2%) across nine behavioral channels. Dual-evidence assessment separately evaluates Component Evidence (coverage of cues and states) and Relationship Evidence (independent studies per cue-state link). 52% of "Very High" relationships rest on one paper, so separation enables calibrated rather than overconfident inference from preliminary findings. The framework's four levels comprise a Cue Vocabulary of 6,434 indicators classified as observable/instrumental; State Clusters linking 2,010 states to indicative cues; State Profiles with multimodal behavioral signatures and actionable specifications; and Discriminative Analysis distinguishing 1,215 confusable state pairs. We identify 480 actionable R1-R4 relationships (three or more independent papers), the replicated core of six decades of research, covering 35.5% of mappings across 47 key learning states and 111 distinct indicators. The remaining 91.5% (9,653 single-paper findings) form exploratory hypotheses for replication. The framework gives researchers an empirical foundation for identifying gaps, practitioners evidence-based tools for state inference, and technologists validated features for multimodal detection.
Your Students Don't Use LLMs Like You Wish They Did
Educational NLP systems are typically evaluated using engagement metrics and satisfaction surveys, which are at best a proxy for meeting pedagogical goals. We introduce six computational metrics for automated evaluation of pedagogical alignment in student-AI dialogue. We validate our metrics through analysis of 12,650 messages across 500 conversations from four courses. Using our metrics, we identify a fundamental misalignment: educators design conversational tutors for sustained learning dialogue, but students mainly use them for answer-extraction. Deployment context is the strongest predictor of usage patterns, outweighing student preference or system design: when AI tools are optional, usage concentrates around deadlines; when integrated into course structure, students ask for solutions to verbatim assignment questions. Whole-dialogue evaluation misses these turn-by-turn patterns. Our metrics will enable researchers building educational dialogue systems to measure whether they are achieving their pedagogical goals.
Cross-Dataset Bloom Question Classification: Supervised Models and Prompted LLMs
Automatic Bloom's taxonomy classification of assessment questions can substantially reduce instructor workload, but labeling is subjective and teacher-dependent. Prior machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) approaches reported strong within-dataset results, yet were rarely evaluated in cross-dataset settings, leaving real-world generalizability unclear; meanwhile, LLM effectiveness for Bloom question classification has not been systematically studied. We evaluated the cross-dataset generalization of existing ML/DL methods and assessed LLMs with multiple prompting strategies on five datasets; the best prompting strategy combined in-context examples with course-specific action verbs. Supervised ML/DL models degraded substantially on unseen datasets, whereas LLMs were more stable, suggesting a robust alternative across diverse educational contexts. Based on the best prompting strategy, we also presented a lightweight UI that supports instructors in automatically classifying large question banks; a usability study indicated low workload and high usability.
Pangu-ACE: Adaptive Cascaded Experts for Educational Response Generation on EduBench
Educational assistants should spend more computation only when the task needs it. This paper rewrites our earlier draft around the system that was actually implemented and archived in the repository: a sample-level 1B to 7B cascade for the shared-8 EduBench benchmark. The final system, Pangu-ACE, uses a 1B tutor-router to produce a draft answer plus routing signals, then either accepts the draft or escalates the sample to a 7B specialist prompt. We also correct a major offline evaluation bug: earlier summaries over-credited some open-form outputs that only satisfied superficial format checks. After CPU-side rescoring from saved prediction JSONL, the full Chinese test archive (7013 samples) shows that cascade_final improves deterministic quality from 0.457 to 0.538 and format validity from 0.707 to 0.866 over the legacy rule_v2 system while accepting 19.7% of requests directly at 1B. Routing is strongly task dependent: IP is accepted by 1B 78.0% of the time, while QG and EC still escalate almost always. The current archived deployment does not yet show latency gains, so the defensible efficiency story is routing selectivity rather than wall-clock speedup. We also package a reproducible artifact-first paper workflow and clarify the remaining external-baseline gap: GPT-5.4 re-judging is implemented locally, but the configured provider endpoint and key are invalid, so final sampled-baseline alignment with GPT-5.4 remains pending infrastructure repair.
A Simulation-Based Method for Testing Collaborative Learning Scaffolds Using LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
Background: Traditional research on collaborative learning scaffolding is often time-consuming and resource-heavy, which hinders the rapid iteration and optimization of instructional strategies. LLM-based multi-agent systems have recently emerged as a powerful tool to simulate complex social interactions and provide a novel paradigm for educational research. Objectives: This study proposes an LLM-based multi-agent simulation approach to investigate collaborative learning processes and the effectiveness of instructional scaffolds prior to actual classroom deployment. The research specifically examines the feasibility of simulating group discussions and the alignment of these simulations with established learning science theories. Methods: The simulation system was implemented using the MetaGPT framework and GPT-4o, comprising one teacher agent and five distinct student roles (Leader, Supporter, Expounder, Rebutter, and Summarizer). Two scaffolding strategies, "Deep Think before Speak" and "Direct Speak", were compared across ten classical Chinese poetry appreciation tasks. Evaluation was conducted through discourse analysis of quality and behavior. Results and Conclusions: The introduction of the "Deep Think before Speak" scaffold significantly improved the agents' discourse diversity and interaction depth while notably reducing content repetitiveness. Behavioral analysis showed that the scaffold encouraged more complex interaction patterns, such as reflecting, rebutting, and explaining. These findings align with the ICAP framework, as the scaffold prompted agents to move from simple "Active" participation to "Constructive" and "Interactive" knowledge co-construction. This study demonstrates the feasibility and ecological validity of using LLM-based multi-agent systems to simulate authentic collaborative learning dynamics.
Persona Matters: Effects of Activation Steering on Short Answer Generation and Scoring
Activation-based steering enables inference-time personalization of large language models, but its effects in educational applications are not well understood. We study activation-based persona vectors representing seven character traits in short-answer generation and automated scoring on the ASAP-SAS benchmark, across three language models spanning dense and mixture-of-experts architectures. Persona steering lowers answer quality overall, with much larger effects on open-ended English Language Arts (ELA) prompts than on factual science prompts. Interpretive and argumentative tasks are particularly sensitive, showing up to 11 larger degradation. On the scoring side, we observe predictable valence-aligned calibration shifts:
evil'' and impolite'' scorers grade more harshly, while good'' and optimistic'' scorers grade more leniently. ELA tasks are 2.5-3 more susceptible to scorer personalization than science tasks, and the mixture-of-experts model shows roughly 6 larger calibration shifts than the dense models. To our knowledge, this is the first study to systematically examine the effects of activation-steered persona traits in educational generation and scoring. Our findings highlight the need for task- and architecture-aware calibration when deploying personalized models in educational settings.EduIllustrate: Towards Scalable Automated Generation Of Multimodal Educational Content
Large language models are increasingly used as educational assistants, yet evaluation of their educational capabilities remains concentrated on question-answering and tutoring tasks. A critical gap exists for multimedia instructional content generation -- the ability to produce coherent, diagram-rich explanations that combine geometrically accurate visuals with step-by-step reasoning. We present EduIllustrate, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs on interleaved text-diagram explanation generation for K-12 STEM problems. The benchmark comprises 230 problems spanning five subjects and three grade levels, a standardized generation protocol with sequential anchoring to enforce cross-diagram visual consistency, and an 8-dimension evaluation rubric grounded in multimedia learning theory covering both text and visual quality. Evaluation of ten LLMs reveals a wide performance spread: Gemini 3.0 Pro Preview leads at 87.8%, while Kimi-K2.5 achieves the best cost-efficiency (80.8% at \ρ\geq 0.83$) while revealing limitations on subjective visual assessment.
Subjective-Graph LLM Agents for Simulating Uncertainty in Classroom Social Perception
Social actors do not observe a common social world: each individual forms judgments from a partial and potentially distorted view of the surrounding network. We study whether graph-local evidence and credibility-weighted communication can generate persistent distortions in perceived academic standing, even when agents repeatedly receive objective performance signals. We introduce a data-constrained multi-agent framework in which LLM agents operate through individualized subjective graphs that determine peer visibility, evidence access, and interaction opportunities. Agents exchange uncertainty-annotated assessments, evaluate message credibility, and maintain explicit Gaussian belief states updated through Bayesian fusion. We evaluate the framework on 12 middle-school classrooms comprising 482 students, using questionnaire-derived social information and six consecutive examinations. On the Social-Observed subset (n=419), collective ranking error increases from 0.066 \pm 0.008 to 0.124 \pm 0.009 across six epochs despite repeated exam-based anchoring. Ablations associate individualized visibility and LLM-based trust gating with more stable long-horizon behavior, while constrained retrieval primarily safeguards against global-information leakage. Compared with evaluated DeGroot configurations, the proposed framework achieves lower final ranking error; those DeGroot configurations exhibit near-zero terminal opinion diversity. These findings establish subjective-graph LLM agents as a mechanism-oriented framework for data-constrained simulated social perception. Code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Rashomonomon-0126.
Personalized AI Practice Replicates Learning Rate Regularity at Scale
Recent research demonstrated that students exhibit consistent learning rates across diverse educational contexts. We test these findings using a dataset of 1.8 million (366k post-filtering) student interactions from the digital platform Campus AI providing further evidence to the observation of regularity in learning rate among students. Unlike prior work requiring manual cognitive modeling, Campus AI automatically generates Knowledge Components (KCs) and corresponding exercises, both of which are validated by human experts. This one-to-many mapping facilitates the application of Additive Factors Models to measure learning parameters without complex cognitive modeling. Using mixed-effects logistic regression, we confirmed the core finding of prior work: students displayed substantial variation in initial knowledge ( practice opportunities to reach 80% mastery) but remarkably consistent learning rates ( opportunities). Furthermore, students using this fully automated system achieved 80% mastery in a median of 7.22 practice opportunities, comparable to the 6.54 reported for expert-designed curricula. These results suggest that automated, science-grounded content generation can support effective personalized learning at scale. Data and code are publicly available. https://github.com/Campus-edu-AI/learning-rate
Optimizing In-Context Demonstrations for LLM-based Automated Grading
Automated assessment of open-ended student responses is a critical capability for scaling personalized feedback in education. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in grading tasks via in-context learning (ICL), their reliability is heavily dependent on the selection of few-shot exemplars and the construction of high-quality rationales. Standard retrieval methods typically select examples based on semantic similarity, which often fails to capture subtle decision boundaries required for rubric adherence. Furthermore, manually crafting the expert rationales needed to guide these models can be a significant bottleneck. To address these limitations, we introduce GUIDE (Grading Using Iteratively Designed Exemplars), a framework that reframes exemplar selection and refinement in automated grading as a boundary-focused optimization problem. GUIDE operates on a continuous loop of selection and refinement, employing novel contrastive operators to identify "boundary pairs" that are semantically similar but possess different grades. We enhance exemplars by generating discriminative rationales that explicitly articulate why a response receives a specific score to the exclusion of adjacent grades. Extensive experiments across datasets in physics, chemistry, and pedagogical content knowledge demonstrate that GUIDE significantly outperforms standard retrieval baselines. By focusing the model's attention on the precise edges of rubric, our approach shows exceptionally robust gains on borderline cases and improved rubric adherence. GUIDE paves the way for trusted, scalable assessment systems that align closely with human pedagogical standards.
Self-hosted Lecture-to-Quiz: Local LLM MCQ Generation with Deterministic Quality Control
We present an end-to-end self-hosted (API-free) pipeline, where API-free means that lecture content is not sent to any external LLM service, that converts lecture PDFs into multiple-choice questions (MCQs) using a local LLM plus deterministic quality control (QC). The pipeline is designed for black-box minimization: LLMs may assist drafting, but the final released artifacts are plain-text question banks with an explicit QC trace and without any need to call an LLM at deployment time. We run a seed sweep on three short "dummy lectures" (information theory, thermodynamics, and statistical mechanics), collecting 15 runs x 8 questions = 120 accepted candidates (122 attempts total under bounded retries). All 120 accepted candidates satisfy hard QC checks (JSON schema conformance, a single marked correct option, and numeric/constant equivalence tests); however, the warning layer flags 8/120 items (spanning 8 runs) that expose residual quality risks such as duplicated distractors or missing rounding instructions. We report a warning taxonomy with concrete before->after fixes, and we release the final 24-question set (three lectures x 8 questions) as JSONL/CSV for Google Forms import (e.g., via Apps Script or API tooling) included as ancillary files under anc/. Finally, we position the work through the AI to Learn (AI2L) rubric lens and argue that self-hosted MCQ generation with explicit QC supports privacy, accountability, and Green AI in educational workflows.
IndicEval: A Bilingual Indian Educational Evaluation Framework for Large Language Models
The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) necessitates evaluation frameworks that reflect real-world academic rigor and multilingual complexity. This paper introduces IndicEval, a scalable benchmarking platform designed to assess LLM performance using authentic high-stakes examination questions from UPSC, JEE, and NEET across STEM and humanities domains in both English and Hindi. Unlike synthetic benchmarks, IndicEval grounds evaluation in real examination standards, enabling realistic measurement of reasoning, domain knowledge, and bilingual adaptability. The framework automates assessment using Zero-Shot, Few-Shot, and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting strategies and supports modular integration of new models and languages. Experiments conducted on Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT-4, Claude, and LLaMA 3-70B reveal three major findings. First, CoT prompting consistently improves reasoning accuracy, with substantial gains across subjects and languages. Second, significant cross-model performance disparities persist, particularly in high-complexity examinations. Third, multilingual degradation remains a critical challenge, with marked accuracy drops in Hindi compared to English, especially under Zero-Shot conditions. These results highlight persistent gaps in bilingual reasoning and domain transfer. Overall, IndicEval provides a practice-oriented, extensible foundation for rigorous, equitable evaluation of LLMs in multilingual educational settings and offers actionable insights for improving reasoning robustness and language adaptability.