LLM-based Multimodal Feedback Produces Equivalent Learning and Better Student Perceptions than Educator Feedback

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15280v1
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:58:08 GMT
• Title: LLM-based Multimodal Feedback Produces Equivalent Learning and Better Student Perceptions than Educator Feedback
• Authors: Chloe Qianhui Zhao, Jie Cao, Jionghao Lin, Kenneth R. Koedinger,
• Abstract summary: This study introduces a real-time AI-facilitated multimodal feedback system that integrates structured textual explanations with dynamic multimedia resources.<n>In an online crowdsourcing experiment, we compared this system against fixed business-as-usual feedback by educators across three dimensions.<n>Results showed that AI multimodal feedback achieved learning gains equivalent to original educator feedback while significantly outperforming it on perceived clarity, specificity, conciseness, motivation, satisfaction, and reducing cognitive load.
• Score: 4.225232488376583
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Providing timely, targeted, and multimodal feedback helps students quickly correct errors, build deep understanding and stay motivated, yet making it at scale remains a challenge. This study introduces a real-time AI-facilitated multimodal feedback system that integrates structured textual explanations with dynamic multimedia resources, including the retrieved most relevant slide page references and streaming AI audio narration. In an online crowdsourcing experiment, we compared this system against fixed business-as-usual feedback by educators across three dimensions: (1) learning effectiveness, (2) learner engagement, (3) perceived feedback quality and value. Results showed that AI multimodal feedback achieved learning gains equivalent to original educator feedback while significantly outperforming it on perceived clarity, specificity, conciseness, motivation, satisfaction, and reducing cognitive load, with comparable correctness, trust, and acceptance. Process logs revealed distinct engagement patterns: for multiple-choice questions, educator feedback encouraged more submissions; for open-ended questions, AI-facilitated targeted suggestions lowered revision barriers and promoted iterative improvement. These findings highlight the potential of AI multimodal feedback to provide scalable, real-time, and context-aware support that both reduces instructor workload and enhances student experience.

Related papers

• Personalized Multimodal Feedback Using Multiple External Representations: Strategy Profiles and Learning in High School Physics [0.11726720776908518]
  Multiple external representations (MERs) and personalized feedback support physics learning, yet evidence on how personalized feedback can effectively integrate MERs remains limited.<n>We conducted a 16-24 week observational study in high school physics using a computer-based platform that provided verification and optional elaborated feedback in verbal, graphical and mathematical forms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T13:25:44Z)
• Scaling Equitable Reflection Assessment in Education via Large Language Models and Role-Based Feedback Agents [2.825140278227664]
  Formative feedback is one of the most effective drivers of student learning.<n>In large or low-resource courses, instructors often lack the time, staffing, and bandwidth required to review and respond to every student reflection.<n>This paper presents a theory-grounded system that uses five coordinated role-based LLM agents to score learner reflections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-14T09:46:21Z)
• Directive, Metacognitive or a Blend of Both? A Comparison of AI-Generated Feedback Types on Student Engagement, Confidence, and Outcomes [1.8839714322633465]
  This study presents a semester-long randomised controlled trial with 329 students in an introductory design and programming course using an adaptive educational platform.<n>Participants were assigned to receive directive, metacognitive, or hybrid AI-generated feedback that blended elements of both directive and metacognitive feedback.<n>Results showed that revision behaviour differed across feedback conditions, with Hybrid prompting the most revisions compared to Directive and Metacognitive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-22T15:31:21Z)
• Listening with Language Models: Using LLMs to Collect and Interpret Classroom Feedback [14.83267437400996]
  Large Language Model (LLM)-powered chatbots can reimagine the classroom feedback process by engaging students in reflective, conversational dialogues.<n>Our findings suggest that LLM-based feedback systems offer richer insights, greater contextual relevance, and higher engagement compared to standard survey tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-13T22:53:55Z)
• On the Role of Feedback in Test-Time Scaling of Agentic AI Workflows [71.92083784393418]
  Agentic AI (systems that autonomously plan and act) are becoming widespread, yet their task success rate on complex tasks remains low.<n>Inference-time alignment relies on three components: sampling, evaluation, and feedback.<n>We introduce Iterative Agent Decoding (IAD), a procedure that repeatedly inserts feedback extracted from different forms of critiques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T17:40:47Z)
• Memento No More: Coaching AI Agents to Master Multiple Tasks via Hints Internalization [56.674356045200696]
  We propose a novel method to train AI agents to incorporate knowledge and skills for multiple tasks without the need for cumbersome note systems or prior high-quality demonstration data.<n>Our approach employs an iterative process where the agent collects new experiences, receives corrective feedback from humans in the form of hints, and integrates this feedback into its weights.<n>We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach by implementing it in a Llama-3-based agent that, after only a few rounds of feedback, outperforms advanced models GPT-4o and DeepSeek-V3 in tasksets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T17:45:46Z)
• "My Grade is Wrong!": A Contestable AI Framework for Interactive Feedback in Evaluating Student Essays [6.810086342993699]
  This paper introduces CAELF, a Contestable AI Empowered LLM Framework for automating interactive feedback. CAELF allows students to query, challenge, and clarify their feedback by integrating a multi-agent system with computational argumentation. A case study on 500 critical thinking essays with user studies demonstrates that CAELF significantly improves interactive feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T17:59:01Z)
• LOVA3: Learning to Visual Question Answering, Asking and Assessment [61.51687164769517]
  Question answering, asking, and assessment are three innate human traits crucial for understanding the world and acquiring knowledge.<n>Current Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) primarily focus on question answering, often neglecting the full potential of questioning and assessment skills.<n>We introduce LOVA3, an innovative framework named "Learning tO Visual question Answering, Asking and Assessment"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T18:21:59Z)
• 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)
• Constructive Large Language Models Alignment with Diverse Feedback [76.9578950893839]
  We introduce Constructive and Diverse Feedback (CDF) as a novel method to enhance large language models alignment. We exploit critique feedback for easy problems, refinement feedback for medium problems, and preference feedback for hard problems. By training our model with this diversified feedback, we achieve enhanced alignment performance while using less training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T09:20:14Z)
• Continually Improving Extractive QA via Human Feedback [59.49549491725224]
  We study continually improving an extractive question answering (QA) system via human user feedback. We conduct experiments involving thousands of user interactions under diverse setups to broaden the understanding of learning from feedback over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-21T14:35:32Z)
• Personalized Multimodal Feedback Generation in Education [50.95346877192268]
  The automatic evaluation for school assignments is an important application of AI in the education field. We propose a novel Personalized Multimodal Feedback Generation Network (PMFGN) armed with a modality gate mechanism and a personalized bias mechanism. Our model significantly outperforms several baselines by generating more accurate and diverse feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-31T05:26:49Z)

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.