PEMUTA: Pedagogically-Enriched Multi-Granular Undergraduate Thesis Assessment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.19556v1
• Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 06:47:26 GMT
• Title: PEMUTA: Pedagogically-Enriched Multi-Granular Undergraduate Thesis Assessment
• Authors: Jialu Zhang, Qingyang Sun, Qianyi Wang, Weiyi Zhang, Zunjie Xiao, Xiaoqing Zhang, Jianfeng Ren, Jiang Liu,
• Abstract summary: The undergraduate thesis (UGTE) plays an indispensable role in assessing a student's cumulative academic development throughout their college years.<n>Although large language models (LLMs) have advanced education intelligence, they typically focus on holistic assessment with only one single evaluation score.<n>We pioneer PEMUTA, a pedagogically-enriched framework that activates domain-specific knowledge from LLMs for multi-granular UGTE assessment.
• Score: 7.912100274675651
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The undergraduate thesis (UGTE) plays an indispensable role in assessing a student's cumulative academic development throughout their college years. Although large language models (LLMs) have advanced education intelligence, they typically focus on holistic assessment with only one single evaluation score, but ignore the intricate nuances across multifaceted criteria, limiting their ability to reflect structural criteria, pedagogical objectives, and diverse academic competencies. Meanwhile, pedagogical theories have long informed manual UGTE evaluation through multi-dimensional assessment of cognitive development, disciplinary thinking, and academic performance, yet remain underutilized in automated settings. Motivated by the research gap, we pioneer PEMUTA, a pedagogically-enriched framework that effectively activates domain-specific knowledge from LLMs for multi-granular UGTE assessment. Guided by Vygotsky's theory and Bloom's Taxonomy, PEMUTA incorporates a hierarchical prompting scheme that evaluates UGTEs across six fine-grained dimensions: Structure, Logic, Originality, Writing, Proficiency, and Rigor (SLOWPR), followed by holistic synthesis. Two in-context learning techniques, \ie, few-shot prompting and role-play prompting, are also incorporated to further enhance alignment with expert judgments without fine-tuning. We curate a dataset of authentic UGTEs with expert-provided SLOWPR-aligned annotations to support multi-granular UGTE assessment. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PEMUTA achieves strong alignment with expert evaluations, and exhibits strong potential for fine-grained, pedagogically-informed UGTE evaluations.

Related papers

• ELMES: An Automated Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models in Educational Scenarios [23.549720214649476]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) present transformative opportunities for education, generating numerous novel application scenarios.<n>Current benchmarks predominantly measure general intelligence rather than pedagogical capabilities.<n>We introduce ELMES, an open-source automated evaluation framework specifically designed for assessing LLMs in educational settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-27T15:20:19Z)
• Rethinking Machine Unlearning in Image Generation Models [59.697750585491264]
  CatIGMU is a novel hierarchical task categorization framework.<n>EvalIGMU is a comprehensive evaluation framework.<n>We construct DataIGM, a high-quality unlearning dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T11:25:14Z)
• MathTutorBench: A Benchmark for Measuring Open-ended Pedagogical Capabilities of LLM Tutors [76.1634959528817]
  We present MathTutorBench, an open-source benchmark for holistic tutoring model evaluation.<n>MathTutorBench contains datasets and metrics that broadly cover tutor abilities as defined by learning sciences research in dialog-based teaching.<n>We evaluate a wide set of closed- and open-weight models and find that subject expertise, indicated by solving ability, does not immediately translate to good teaching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T08:43:47Z)
• Learning to Align Multi-Faceted Evaluation: A Unified and Robust Framework [61.38174427966444]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are being used more and more extensively for automated evaluation in various scenarios.<n>Previous studies have attempted to fine-tune open-source LLMs to replicate the evaluation explanations and judgments of powerful proprietary models.<n>We propose a novel evaluation framework, ARJudge, that adaptively formulates evaluation criteria and synthesizes both text-based and code-driven analyses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T06:31:45Z)
• SuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation across 285 Graduate Disciplines [118.8024915014751]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in academic disciplines such as mathematics, physics, and computer science.<n>However, human knowledge encompasses over 200 specialized disciplines, far exceeding the scope of existing benchmarks.<n>We present SuperGPQA, a benchmark that evaluates graduate-level knowledge and reasoning capabilities across 285 disciplines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T17:05:58Z)
• Unifying AI Tutor Evaluation: An Evaluation Taxonomy for Pedagogical Ability Assessment of LLM-Powered AI Tutors [7.834688858839734]
  We investigate whether current state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) are effective as AI tutors.<n>We propose a unified evaluation taxonomy with eight pedagogical dimensions based on key learning sciences principles.<n>We release MRBench - a new evaluation benchmark containing 192 conversations and 1,596 responses from seven state-of-the-art LLM-based and human tutors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T16:24:35Z)
• An Exploration of Higher Education Course Evaluation by Large Language Models [4.943165921136573]
  Large language models (LLMs) within artificial intelligence (AI) present promising new avenues for enhancing course evaluation processes. This study explores the application of LLMs in automated course evaluation from multiple perspectives and conducts rigorous experiments across 100 courses at a major university in China.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T20:43:52Z)
• MMIE: Massive Multimodal Interleaved Comprehension Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Models [71.36392373876505]
  We introduce MMIE, a large-scale benchmark for evaluating interleaved multimodal comprehension and generation in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs)<n>MMIE comprises 20K meticulously curated multimodal queries, spanning 3 categories, 12 fields, and 102 subfields, including mathematics, coding, physics, literature, health, and arts.<n>It supports both interleaved inputs and outputs, offering a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended question formats to evaluate diverse competencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T04:15:00Z)
• Facilitating Holistic Evaluations with LLMs: Insights from Scenario-Based Experiments [0.22499166814992438]
  Even experienced faculty teams find it challenging to realize a holistic evaluation that accommodates diverse perspectives. This paper explores the use of a Large Language Model (LLM) as a facilitator to integrate diverse faculty assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T01:07:06Z)
• Enhancing LLM-Based Feedback: Insights from Intelligent Tutoring Systems and the Learning Sciences [0.0]
  This work advocates careful and caring AIED research by going through previous research on feedback generation in ITS. The main contributions of this paper include: an avocation of applying more cautious, theoretically grounded methods in feedback generation in the era of generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T20:09:18Z)
• 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)

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.