The Impact of AI on Educational Assessment: A Framework for Constructive Alignment
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23815v2
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2025 07:51:20 GMT
- Title: The Impact of AI on Educational Assessment: A Framework for Constructive Alignment
- Authors: Patrick Stokkink,
- Abstract summary: We argue that AI influences learning objectives of different Bloom levels in a different way.<n>We propose structured guidelines on a university or faculty level, to foster alignment among the staff.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: The influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI), and specifically Large Language Models (LLM), on education is continuously increasing. These models are frequently used by students, giving rise to the question whether current forms of assessment are still a valid way to evaluate student performance and comprehension. The theoretical framework developed in this paper is grounded in Constructive Alignment (CA) theory and Bloom's taxonomy for defining learning objectives. We argue that AI influences learning objectives of different Bloom levels in a different way, and assessment has to be adopted accordingly. Furthermore, in line with Bloom's vision, formative and summative assessment should be aligned on whether the use of AI is permitted or not. Although lecturers tend to agree that education and assessment need to be adapted to the presence of AI, a strong bias exists on the extent to which lecturers want to allow for AI in assessment. This bias is caused by a lecturer's familiarity with AI and specifically whether they use it themselves. To avoid this bias, we propose structured guidelines on a university or faculty level, to foster alignment among the staff. Besides that, we argue that teaching staff should be trained on the capabilities and limitations of AI tools. In this way, they are better able to adapt their assessment methods.
Related papers
- AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL): A Conceptual Framework to Bridge AI Capabilities with Classical Educational Theories [8.500617875591633]
This study introduces the AI-Educational Development Loop (AI-EDL), a theory-driven framework that integrates classical learning theories with human-in-the-loop artificial intelligence (AI)<n>The framework emphasizes transparency, self-regulated learning, and pedagogical oversight.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-01T15:44:19Z) - Distinguishing Fact from Fiction: Student Traits, Attitudes, and AI Hallucination Detection in Business School Assessment [2.3359837623080613]
We examine how academic skills, cognitive traits, and AI scepticism influence students' ability to detect factually incorrect AI-generated responses (hallucinations) in a high-stakes assessment at a UK business school.<n>We find that only 20% successfully identified the hallucination, with strong academic performance, interpretive skills thinking, writing proficiency, and AI scepticism emerging as key predictors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-28T18:39:57Z) - A Human-Centric Approach to Explainable AI for Personalized Education [1.0878040851638]
This thesis aims to bring human needs to the forefront of eXplainable AI (XAI) research.<n>We propose four novel technical contributions in interpretability with a multimodal modular architecture.<n>Our work lays a foundation for human-centric AI systems that balance state-of-the-art performance with built-in transparency and trust.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-28T16:23:48Z) - Beyond Detection: Designing AI-Resilient Assessments with Automated Feedback Tool to Foster Critical Thinking [0.0]
This research proposes a proactive, AI-resilient solution based on assessment design rather than detection.<n>It introduces a web-based Python tool that integrates Bloom's taxonomy with advanced natural language processing techniques.<n>It helps educators determine whether a task targets lower-order thinking such as recall and summarization or higher-order skills such as analysis, evaluation, and creation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-30T23:13:00Z) - AI in Education: Rationale, Principles, and Instructional Implications [0.0]
Generative AI, like ChatGPT, can create human-like content, prompting questions about its educational role.<n>The study emphasizes deliberate strategies to ensure AI complements, not replaces, genuine cognitive effort.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-02T14:08:07Z) - Auto-assessment of assessment: A conceptual framework towards fulfilling the policy gaps in academic assessment practices [4.770873744131964]
We surveyed 117 academics from three countries (UK, UAE, and Iraq)
We identified that most academics retain positive opinions regarding AI in education.
For the first time, we propose a novel AI framework for autonomously evaluating students' work.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-28T15:22:37Z) - Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act)
Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence.
As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z) - Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks.
We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering.
In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z) - Evaluating and Optimizing Educational Content with Large Language Model Judgments [52.33701672559594]
We use Language Models (LMs) as educational experts to assess the impact of various instructions on learning outcomes.
We introduce an instruction optimization approach in which one LM generates instructional materials using the judgments of another LM as a reward function.
Human teachers' evaluations of these LM-generated worksheets show a significant alignment between the LM judgments and human teacher preferences.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-05T09:09:15Z) - Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations.
It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z) - Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society.
A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests.
This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z) - Explainable Active Learning (XAL): An Empirical Study of How Local
Explanations Impact Annotator Experience [76.9910678786031]
We propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by introducing techniques from the recently surging field of explainable AI (XAI) into an Active Learning setting.
Our study shows benefits of AI explanation as interfaces for machine teaching--supporting trust calibration and enabling rich forms of teaching feedback, and potential drawbacks--anchoring effect with the model judgment and cognitive workload.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-01-24T22:52:18Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.