AI Ed Researcher

Authors: Ting Wang, Caroline Prendergast, Susan Lottridge

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for generating domain-specific multiple-choice questions (MCQs), offering efficiency gains for certification boards but raising new concerns about examination security. This study investigated whether LLM-generated items created with proprietary guidance differ meaningfully from those generated using only publicly available resources. Four representative clinical activities from the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) blueprint were mapped to corresponding Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs), and three LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude 4 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Flash) produced items under a naive strategy using only public EPA descriptors, while GPT-4o additionally produced items under a guided strategy that incorporated proprietary blueprints, item-writing guidelines, and exemplar items, yielding 160 total items. Question stems and options were encoded using PubMedBERT and BioBERT, and intra- and inter-strategy cosine similarity coefficients were calculated. Results showed high internal consistency within each prompting strategy, while cross-strategy similarity was lower overall. However, several domain model pairs, particularly in narrowly defined areas such as viral pneumonia and hypertension, exceeded the 0.65 threshold, indicating convergence between naive and guided pipelines. These findings suggest that while proprietary resources impart distinctiveness, LLMs prompted only with public information can still generate items closely resembling guided outputs in constrained clinical domains, thereby heightening risks of item exposure. Safeguarding the integrity of high stakes examinations will require human-first, AI-assisted item development, strict separation of formative and summative item pools, and systematic similarity surveillance to balance innovation with security.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23729

Authors: Mario Angelelli, Morena Oliva, Serena Arima, Enrico Ciavolino

Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in social and psychological research. Among potential applications, LLMs can be used to generate, customise, or adapt measurement instruments. This study presents a preliminary investigation of AI-generated questionnaires by comparing two ChatGPT-based adaptations of the Body Awareness Questionnaire (BAQ) with the validated human-developed version. The AI instruments were designed with different levels of explicitness in content and instructions on construct facets, and their psychometric properties were assessed using a Bayesian Graded Response Model. Results show that although surface wording between AI and original items was similar, differences emerged in dimensionality and in the distribution of item and test information across latent traits. These findings illustrate the importance of applying statistical measures of accuracy to ensure the validity and interpretability of AI-driven tools.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.24739

Authors: LearnLM Team Google, Eedi:Albert Wang, Aliya Rysbek, Andrea Huber, Anjali Nambiar, Anna Kenolty, Ben Caulfield, Beth Lilley-Draper, Bibi Groot, Brian Veprek, Chelsea Burdett, Claire Willis, Craig Barton, Digory Smith, George Mu, Harriet Walters, Irina Jurenka, Iris Hulls, James Stalley-Moores, Jonathan Caton, Julia Wilkowski, Kaiz Alarakyia, Kevin R. McKee, Liam McCafferty, Lucy Dalton, Markus Kunesch, Pauline Malubay, Rachel Kidson, Rich Wells, Sam Wheeler, Sara Wiltberger, Shakir Mohamed, Simon Woodhead, Vasco Brazão

Abstract: One-to-one tutoring is widely considered the gold standard for personalized education, yet it remains prohibitively expensive to scale. To evaluate whether generative AI might help expand access to this resource, we conducted an exploratory randomized controlled trial (RCT) with $N = 165$ students across five UK secondary schools. We integrated LearnLM — a generative AI model fine-tuned for pedagogy — into chat-based tutoring sessions on the Eedi mathematics platform. In the RCT, expert tutors directly supervised LearnLM, with the remit to revise each message it drafted until they would be satisfied sending it themselves. LearnLM proved to be a reliable source of pedagogical instruction, with supervising tutors approving 76.4% of its drafted messages making zero or minimal edits (i.e., changing only one or two characters). This translated into effective tutoring support: students guided by LearnLM performed at least as well as students chatting with human tutors on each learning outcome we measured. In fact, students who received support from LearnLM were 5.5 percentage points more likely to solve novel problems on subsequent topics (with a success rate of 66.2%) than those who received tutoring from human tutors alone (rate of 60.7%). In interviews, tutors highlighted LearnLM’s strength at drafting Socratic questions that encouraged deeper reflection from students, with multiple tutors even reporting that they learned new pedagogical practices from the model. Overall, our results suggest that pedagogically fine-tuned AI tutoring systems may play a promising role in delivering effective, individualized learning support at scale.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23633

Authors: Quanzhi Fu, Qiyu Wu, Dan Williams

Abstract: With the significant increase in enrollment in computing-related programs over the past 20 years, lecture sizes have grown correspondingly. In large lectures, instructors face challenges on identifying students’ knowledge gaps timely, which is critical for effective teaching. Existing classroom response systems rely on instructor-initiated interactions, which limits their ability to capture the spontaneous knowledge gaps that naturally emerge during lectures. With the widespread adoption of LLMs among students, we recognize these student-AI dialogues as a valuable, student-centered data source for identifying knowledge gaps. In this idea paper, we propose QueryQuilt, a multi-agent LLM framework that automatically detects common knowledge gaps in large-scale lectures by analyzing students’ chat logs with AI assistants. QueryQuilt consists of two key components: (1) a Dialogue Agent that responds to student questions while employing probing questions to reveal underlying knowledge gaps, and (2) a Knowledge Gap Identification Agent that systematically analyzes these dialogues to identify knowledge gaps across the student population. By generating frequency distributions of identified gaps, instructors can gain comprehensive insights into class-wide understanding. Our evaluation demonstrates promising results, with QueryQuilt achieving 100% accuracy in identifying knowledge gaps among simulated students and 95% completeness when tested on real student-AI dialogue data. These initial findings indicate the system’s potential for facilitate teaching in authentic learning environments. We plan to deploy QueryQuilt in actual classroom settings for comprehensive evaluation, measuring its detection accuracy and impact on instruction.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.22404

Authors: Bo Yuan, Jiazi Hu

Abstract: Course evaluation plays a critical role in ensuring instructional quality and guiding curriculum development in higher education. However, traditional evaluation methods, such as student surveys, classroom observations, and expert reviews, are often constrained by subjectivity, high labor costs, and limited scalability. With recent advancements in large language models (LLMs), new opportunities have emerged for generating consistent, fine-grained, and scalable course evaluations. This study investigates the use of three representative LLMs for automated course evaluation at both the micro level (classroom discussion analysis) and the macro level (holistic course review). Using classroom interaction transcripts and a dataset of 100 courses from a major institution in China, we demonstrate that LLMs can extract key pedagogical features and generate structured evaluation results aligned with expert judgement. A fine-tuned version of Llama shows superior reliability, producing score distributions with greater differentiation and stronger correlation with human evaluators than its counterparts. The results highlight three major findings: (1) LLMs can reliably perform systematic and interpretable course evaluations at both the micro and macro levels; (2) fine-tuning and prompt engineering significantly enhance evaluation accuracy and consistency; and (3) LLM-generated feedback provides actionable insights for teaching improvement. These findings illustrate the promise of LLM-based evaluation as a practical tool for supporting quality assurance and educational decision-making in large-scale higher education settings.

Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.02455