Personalized and Constructive Feedback for Computer Science Students Using the Large Language Model (LLM)

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.11556v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 15:59:30 GMT
• Title: Personalized and Constructive Feedback for Computer Science Students Using the Large Language Model (LLM)
• Authors: Javed Ali Khan, Muhammad Yaqoob, Mamoona Tasadduq, Hafsa Shareef Dar, Aitezaz Ahsan,
• Abstract summary: This paper investigates the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in processing students assessments with predefined rubrics and marking criteria.<n>We aim to leverage the power of existing LLMs for Marking Assessments, Tracking, and Evaluation (LLM-MATE) with personalized feedback to enhance students learning.
• Score: 0.8409304328108455
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The evolving pedagogy paradigms are leading toward educational transformations. One fundamental aspect of effective learning is relevant, immediate, and constructive feedback to students. Providing constructive feedback to large cohorts in academia is an ongoing challenge. Therefore, academics are moving towards automated assessment to provide immediate feedback. However, current approaches are often limited in scope, offering simplistic responses that do not provide students with personalized feedback to guide them toward improvements. This paper addresses this limitation by investigating the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in processing students assessments with predefined rubrics and marking criteria to generate personalized feedback for in-depth learning. We aim to leverage the power of existing LLMs for Marking Assessments, Tracking, and Evaluation (LLM-MATE) with personalized feedback to enhance students learning. To evaluate the performance of LLM-MATE, we consider the Software Architecture (SA) module as a case study. The LLM-MATE approach can help module leaders overcome assessment challenges with large cohorts. Also, it helps students improve their learning by obtaining personalized feedback in a timely manner. Additionally, the proposed approach will facilitate the establishment of ground truth for automating the generation of students assessment feedback using the ChatGPT API, thereby reducing the overhead associated with large cohort assessments.

Related papers

• Partnering with AI: A Pedagogical Feedback System for LLM Integration into Programming Education [21.37197118335639]
  This paper introduces a novel framework for large language models (LLMs)-driven feedback generation.<n>Our findings suggest that teachers consider that, when aligned with the framework, LLMs can effectively support students.<n>However, we found several limitations, such as its inability to adapt feedback to dynamic classroom contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-01T03:48:48Z)
• A Practical Guide for Supporting Formative Assessment and Feedback Using Generative AI [0.0]
  Large-language models (LLMs) can help students, teachers, and peers understand "where learners are going," "where learners currently are," and "how to move learners forward"<n>This review provides a comprehensive foundation for integrating LLMs into formative assessment in a pedagogically informed manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T12:52:43Z)
• Self-Evolving Critique Abilities in Large Language Models [59.861013614500024]
  This paper explores enhancing critique abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We introduce SCRIT, a framework that trains LLMs with self-generated data to evolve their critique abilities.<n>Our analysis reveals that SCRIT's performance scales positively with data and model size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T05:51:52Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Critique Models with Test-Time and Training-Time Supervision [120.40788744292739]
  We propose a two-player paradigm that separates the roles of reasoning and critique models. We first propose AutoMathCritique, an automated and scalable framework for collecting critique data. We demonstrate that the critique models consistently improve the actor's performance on difficult queries at test-time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T17:11:54Z)
• Automated Feedback in Math Education: A Comparative Analysis of LLMs for Open-Ended Responses [0.0]
  This study aims to explore the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) in facilitating automated feedback in math education. We employ Mistral, a version of Llama catered to math, and fine-tune this model for evaluating student responses by leveraging a dataset of student responses and teacher-written feedback for middle-school math problems. We evaluate the model's performance in scoring accuracy and the quality of feedback by utilizing judgments from 2 teachers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T16:57:45Z)
• Closing the Loop: Learning to Generate Writing Feedback via Language Model Simulated Student Revisions [6.216542656489173]
  We propose PROF that PROduces Feedback via learning from LM simulated student revisions. We empirically test the efficacy of PROF and observe that our approach surpasses a variety of baseline methods in effectiveness of improving students' writing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T15:52:48Z)
• Large Language Model as an Assignment Evaluator: Insights, Feedback, and Challenges in a 1000+ Student Course [49.296957552006226]
  Using large language models (LLMs) for automatic evaluation has become an important evaluation method in NLP research. This report shares how we use GPT-4 as an automatic assignment evaluator in a university course with 1,028 students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T00:17:24Z)
• 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)
• Improving the Validity of Automatically Generated Feedback via Reinforcement Learning [46.667783153759636]
  We propose a framework for feedback generation that optimize both correctness and alignment using reinforcement learning (RL)<n>Specifically, we use GPT-4's annotations to create preferences over feedback pairs in an augmented dataset for training via direct preference optimization (DPO)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T20:25:50Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
  We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)

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.