AI Ed Researcher

Authors: Thorsten Fröhlich, Tim Schlippe

Abstract: The evaluation of academic theses is a cornerstone of higher education, ensuring rigor and integrity. Traditional methods, though effective, are time-consuming and subject to evaluator variability. This paper presents RubiSCoT, an AI-supported framework designed to enhance thesis evaluation from proposal to final submission. Using advanced natural language processing techniques, including large language models, retrieval-augmented generation, and structured chain-of-thought prompting, RubiSCoT offers a consistent, scalable solution. The framework includes preliminary assessments, multidimensional assessments, content extraction, rubric-based scoring, and detailed reporting. We present the design and implementation of RubiSCoT, discussing its potential to optimize academic assessment processes through consistent, scalable, and transparent evaluation.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.17309

Authors: Xinran Zhu, Cong Wang, Duane Searsmith

Abstract: The growing integration of generative AI in higher education is transforming how students write, learn, and engage with knowledge. As AI tools become more integrated into classrooms, there is an urgent need for pedagogical approaches that help students use them critically and reflectively. This study proposes a pedagogical design that integrates AI and peer feedback in a graduate-level academic writing activity. Over eight weeks, students developed literature review projects through multiple writing and revision stages, receiving feedback from both a custom-built AI reviewer and human peers. We examine two questions: (1) How did students interact with and incorporate AI and peer feedback during the writing process? and (2) How did they reflect on and build relationships with both human and AI reviewers? Data sources include student writing artifacts, AI and peer feedback, AI chat logs, and student reflections. Findings show that students engaged differently with each feedback source-relying on AI for rubric alignment and surface-level edits, and on peer feedback for conceptual development and disciplinary relevance. Reflections revealed evolving relationships with AI, characterized by increasing confidence, strategic use, and critical awareness of its limitations. The pedagogical design supported writing development, AI literacy, and disciplinary understanding. This study offers a scalable pedagogical model for integrating AI into writing instruction and contributes insights for system-level approaches to fostering meaningful human-AI collaboration in higher education.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15750

Authors: Joaquín Jordán, Xavier Yin, Melissa Fabros, Gireeja Ranade, Narges Norouzi

Abstract: Automated Essay Scoring (AES) and Automatic Essay Feedback (AEF) systems aim to reduce the workload of human raters in educational assessment. However, most existing systems prioritize numerical scoring accuracy over feedback quality and are primarily evaluated on pre-secondary school level writing. This paper presents Multi-Agent Argumentation and Grammar Integrated Critiquer (MAGIC), a framework using five specialized agents to evaluate prompt adherence, persuasiveness, organization, vocabulary, and grammar for both holistic scoring and detailed feedback generation. To support evaluation at the college level, we collated a dataset of Graduate Record Examination (GRE) practice essays with expert-evaluated scores and feedback. MAGIC achieves substantial to near-perfect scoring agreement with humans on the GRE data, outperforming baseline LLM models while providing enhanced interpretability through its multi-agent approach. We also compare MAGIC’s feedback generation capabilities against ground truth human feedback and baseline models, finding that MAGIC achieves strong feedback quality and naturalness.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.13037

Authors: Firdavs Nasriddinov, Rafal Kocielnik, Anima Anandkumar, Andrew J. Hung

Abstract: High-quality intraoperative feedback from a surgical trainer is pivotal for improving trainee performance and long-term skill acquisition. Automating natural, trainer-style feedback promises timely, accessible, and consistent guidance at scale but requires models that understand clinically relevant representations. We present a structure-aware pipeline that learns a surgical action ontology from real trainer-to-trainee transcripts (33 surgeries) and uses it to condition feedback generation. We contribute by (1) mining Instrument-Action-Target (IAT) triplets from real-world feedback text and clustering surface forms into normalized categories, (2) fine-tuning a video-to-IAT model that leverages the surgical procedure and task contexts as well as fine-grained temporal instrument motion, and (3) demonstrating how to effectively use IAT triplet representations to guide GPT-4o in generating clinically grounded, trainer-style feedback. We show that, on Task 1: Video-to-IAT recognition, our context injection and temporal tracking deliver consistent AUC gains (Instrument: 0.67 to 0.74; Action: 0.60 to 0.63; Tissue: 0.74 to 0.79). For Task 2: feedback text generation (rated on a 1-5 fidelity rubric where 1 = opposite/unsafe, 3 = admissible, and 5 = perfect match to a human trainer), GPT-4o from video alone scores 2.17, while IAT conditioning reaches 2.44 (+12.4%), doubling the share of admissible generations with score >= 3 from 21% to 42%. Traditional text-similarity metrics also improve: word error rate decreases by 15-31% and ROUGE (phrase/substring overlap) increases by 9-64%. Grounding generation in explicit IAT structure improves fidelity and yields clinician-verifiable rationales, supporting auditable use in surgical training.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15159

Authors: Yang Wu, Rujing Yao, Tong Zhang, Yufei Shi, Zhuoren Jiang, Zhushan Li, Xiaozhong Liu

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into intelligent tutoring systems to provide human-like and adaptive instruction. However, most existing approaches fail to capture how students’ knowledge evolves dynamically across their proficiencies, conceptual gaps, and forgetting patterns. This challenge is particularly acute in mathematics tutoring, where effective instruction requires fine-grained scaffolding precisely calibrated to each student’s mastery level and cognitive retention. To address this issue, we propose TASA (Teaching According to Students’ Aptitude), a student-aware tutoring framework that integrates persona, memory, and forgetting dynamics for personalized mathematics learning. Specifically, TASA maintains a structured student persona capturing proficiency profiles and an event memory recording prior learning interactions. By incorporating a continuous forgetting curve with knowledge tracing, TASA dynamically updates each student’s mastery state and generates contextually appropriate, difficulty-calibrated questions and explanations. Empirical results demonstrate that TASA achieves superior learning outcomes and more adaptive tutoring behavior compared to representative baselines, underscoring the importance of modeling temporal forgetting and learner profiles in LLM-based tutoring systems.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15163