More Like this

1. Grading explanations of problem-solving process and generating feedback using large language models at human-level accuracy

   https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.21.010126  

   Chen, Zhongzhou; Wan, Tong (March 2025, Physical Review Physics Education Research)

   This study examines the feasibility and potential advantages of using large language models, in particular GPT-4o, to perform partial credit grading of large numbers of student written responses to introductory level physics problems. Students were instructed to write down verbal explanations of their reasoning process when solving one conceptual and two numerical calculation problems on two exams. The explanations were then graded according to a three-item rubric with each item graded as binary (1 or 0). We first demonstrate that machine grading using GPT-4o with no examples or reference answers can reliably agree with human graders in 70%–80% of all cases, which is equal to or higher than the level at which two human graders agree with each other. Two methods are essential for achieving this level of accuracy: (i) Adding explanation language to each rubric item that targets the errors of initial machine grading. (ii) Running the grading process 5 times and taking the most frequent outcome. Next, we show that the variation in outcomes across five machine grading attempts can serve as a grading confidence index. The index allows a human expert to identify $\sim 40\%$of all potentially incorrect gradings by reviewing just 10%–15% of all responses with the highest variation. Finally, we show that it is straightforward to use GPT-4o to write a clear and detailed explanation of the partial credit grading outcome. Those explanations can be used as feedback for students, which will allow students to understand their grades and raise different opinions when necessary. Almost all feedback messages generated were rated three or above on a five-point scale by two instructors who had taught the course multiple times. The entire grading and feedback generating process costs roughly $5 per 100 student answers, which shows immense promise for automating labor-intensive grading process through a combination of machine grading with human input and supervision. Published by the American Physical Society2025 

   more » « less
2. Human-AI Collaboration in a Student Discussion Forum

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3640544.3645215  

   Laney, Mason; Dewan, Prasun (March 2024, ACM)

   The recent public releases of AI tools such as ChatGPT have forced computer science educators to reconsider how they teach. These tools have demonstrated considerable ability to generate code and answer conceptual questions, rendering them incredibly useful for completing CS coursework. While overreliance on AI tools could hinder students’ learning, we believe they have the potential to be a helpful resource for both students and instructors alike. We propose a novel system for instructor-mediated GPT interaction in a class discussion board. By automatically generating draft responses to student forum posts, GPT can help Teaching Assistants (TAs) respond to student questions in a more timely manner, giving students an avenue to receive fast, quality feedback on their solutions without turning to ChatGPT directly. Additionally, since they are involved in the process, instructors can ensure that the information students receive is accurate, and can provide students with incremental hints that encourage them to engage critically with the material, rather than just copying an AI-generated snippet of code. We utilize Piazza—a popular educational forum where TAs help students via text exchanges—as a venue for GPT-assisted TA responses to student questions. These student questions are sent to GPT-4 alongside assignment instructions and a customizable prompt, both of which are stored in editable instructor-only Piazza posts. We demonstrate an initial implementation of this system, and provide examples of student questions that highlight its benefits. 

   more » « less
3. A LLM-Powered Automatic Grading Framework with Human-Level Guidelines Optimization

   https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15870201  

   Chu, Yucheng; Li, Hang; Yang, Kaiqi; Shomer, Harry; Copur-Gencturk, Yasemin; Kaldaras, Leonora; Haudek, Kevin; Krajcik, Joseph; Shin, Namsoo; Liu, Hui; et al (July 2025, International Educational Data Mining Society)

   Mills, Caitlin; Alexandron, Giora; Taibi, Davide; Lo_Bosco, Giosuè; Paquette, Luc (Ed.)

   Open-text responses provide researchers and educators with rich, nuanced insights that multiple-choice questions cannot capture. When reliably assessed, such responses have the potential to enhance teaching and learning. However, scaling and consistently capturing these nuances remain significant challenges, limiting the widespread use of open-text questions in educational research and assessments. In this paper, we introduce and evaluate GradeOpt, a unified multiagent automatic short-answer grading (ASAG) framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) as graders for short-answer responses. More importantly, GradeOpt incorporates two additional LLM-based agents—the reflector and the refiner—into the multi-agent system. This enables GradeOpt to automatically optimize the original grading guidelines by performing self-reflection on its errors. To assess GradeOpt's effectiveness, we conducted experiments on two representative ASAG datasets, which include items designed to capture key aspects of teachers' pedagogical knowledge and students' learning progress. Our results demonstrate that GradeOpt consistently outperforms representative baselines in both grading accuracy and alignment with human evaluators across different knowledge domains. Finally, comprehensive ablation studies validate the contributions of GradeOpt's individual components, confirming their impact on overall performance. 

   more » « less
4. Creating a biomedical knowledge base by addressing GPT inaccurate responses and benchmarking context

   https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.16.618663  

   Darnell, S Solomon; Overall, Rupert W; Guarracino, Andrea; Colonna, Vicenza; Villani, Flavia; Garrison, Erik; Isaac, Arun; Muli, Priscilla; Muriithi, Frederick Muriuki; Kabui, Alexander; et al (October 2024, bioRxiv)

   We created GNQA, a generative pre-trained transformer (GPT) knowledge base driven by a performant retrieval augmented generation (RAG) with a focus on aging, dementia, Alzheimer’s and diabetes. We uploaded a corpus of three thousand peer reviewed publications on these topics into the RAG. To address concerns about inaccurate responses and GPT ‘hallucinations’, we implemented a context provenance tracking mechanism that enables researchers to validate responses against the original material and to get references to the original papers. To assess the effectiveness of contextual information we collected evaluations and feedback from both domain expert users and ‘citizen scientists’ on the relevance of GPT responses. A key innovation of our study is automated evaluation by way of a RAG assessment system (RAGAS). RAGAS combines human expert assessment with AI-driven evaluation to measure the effectiveness of RAG systems. When evaluating the responses to their questions, human respondents give a “thumbs-up” 76% of the time. Meanwhile, RAGAS scores 90% on answer relevance on questions posed by experts. And when GPT-generates questions, RAGAS scores 74% on answer relevance. With RAGAS we created a benchmark that can be used to continuously assess the performance of our knowledge base. Full GNQA functionality is embedded in the freeGeneNetwork.orgweb service, an open-source system containing over 25 years of experimental data on model organisms and human. The code developed for this study is published under a free and open-source software license athttps://git.genenetwork.org/gn-ai/tree/README.md. 

   more » « less
5. A Chain-of-Thought Prompting Approach with LLMs for Evaluating Students’ Formative Assessment Responses in Science

   Cohn, Clayton; Hutchins, Nicole; Biswas, Gautam (September 2023, AAAI Press)

   Martin Fred; Norouzi, Narges; Rosenthal, Stephanie (Ed.)

   This paper examines the use of LLMs to support the grading and explanation of short-answer formative assessments in K12 science topics. While significant work has been done on programmatically scoring well-structured student assessments in math and computer science, many of these approaches produce a numerical score and stop short of providing teachers and students with explanations for the assigned scores. In this paper, we investigate few-shot, in-context learning with chain-of-thought reasoning and active learning using GPT-4 for automated assessment of students’ answers in a middle school Earth Science curriculum. Our findings from this human-in-the-loop approach demonstrate success in scoring formative assessment responses and in providing meaningful explanations for the assigned score. We then perform a systematic analysis of the advantages and limitations of our approach. This research provides insight into how we can use human-in-the-loop methods for the continual improvement of automated grading for open-ended science assessments. 

   more » « less