Short answer assessment is a vital component of science education, allowing evaluation of students' complex three-dimensional understanding. Large language models (LLMs) that possess human-like ability in linguistic tasks are increasingly popular in assisting human graders to reduce their workload. However, LLMs' limitations in domain knowledge restrict their understanding in task-specific requirements and hinder their ability to achieve satisfactory performance. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) emerges as a promising solution by enabling LLMs to access relevant domain-specific knowledge during assessment. In this work, we propose an adaptive RAG framework for automated grading that dynamically retrieves and incorporates domain-specific knowledge based on the question and student answer context. Our approach combines semantic search and curated educational sources to retrieve valuable reference materials. Experimental results in a science education dataset demonstrate that our system achieves an improvement in grading accuracy compared to baseline LLM approaches. The findings suggest that RAG-enhanced grading systems can serve as reliable support with efficient performance gains.

Effective feedback is essential for fostering students' success in scientific inquiry. With advancements in artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for delivering instant and adaptive feedback. However, this feedback often lacks the pedagogical validation provided by real-world practitioners. To address this limitation, our study evaluates and compares the feedback quality of LLM agents with that of human teachers and science education experts on student-written experimentation protocols. Four blinded raters, all professionals in scientific inquiry and science education, evaluated the feedback texts generated by 1) the LLM agent, 2) the teachers and 3) the science education experts using a five-point Likert scale based on six criteria of effective feedback: Feed Up, Feed Back, Feed Forward, Constructive Tone, Linguistic Clarity, and Technical Terminology. Our results indicate that LLM-generated feedback shows no significant difference to that of teachers and experts in overall quality. However, the LLM agent's performance lags in the Feed Back dimension, which involves identifying and explaining errors within the student's work context. Qualitative analysis highlighted the LLM agent's limitations in contextual understanding and in the clear communication of specific errors. Our findings suggest that combining LLM-generated feedback with human expertise can enhance educational practices by leveraging the efficiency of LLMs and the nuanced understanding of educators.

Introductory programming courses often emphasize mastering syntax and basic constructs before progressing to more complex and interesting programs. This bottom-up approach can be frustrating for novices, shifting the focus away from problem solving and potentially making computing less appealing to a broad range of students. The rise of generative AI for code production could partially address these issues by fostering new skills via interaction with AI models, including constructing high-level prompts and evaluating code that is automatically generated. In this experience report, we explore the inclusion of two prompt-focused activities in an introductory course, implemented across four labs in a six-week module. The first requires students to solve computational problems by writing natural language prompts, emphasizing problem-solving over syntax. The second involves students crafting prompts to generate code equivalent to provided fragments, to foster an understanding of the relationship between prompts and code. Most of the students in the course had reported finding programming difficult to learn, often citing frustrations with syntax and debugging. We found that self-reported difficulty with learning programming had a strong inverse relationship with performance on traditional programming assessments such as tests and projects, as expected. However, performance on the natural language tasks was less strongly related to self-reported difficulty, suggesting they may target different skills. Learning how to communicate with AI coding models is becoming an important skill, and natural language prompting tasks may appeal to a broad range of students.

The sudden emergence of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT has had a disruptive impact throughout the computing education community. LLMs have been shown to excel at producing correct code to CS1 and CS2 problems, and can even act as friendly assistants to students learning how to code. Recent work shows that LLMs demonstrate unequivocally superior results in being able to explain and resolve compiler error messages -- for decades, one of the most frustrating parts of learning how to code. However, LLM-generated error message explanations have only been assessed by expert programmers in artificial conditions. This work sought to understand how novice programmers resolve programming error messages (PEMs) in a more realistic scenario. We ran a within-subjects study with $n$ = 106 participants in which students were tasked to fix six buggy C programs. For each program, participants were randomly assigned to fix the problem using either a stock compiler error message, an expert-handwritten error message, or an error message explanation generated by GPT-4. Despite promising evidence on synthetic benchmarks, we found that GPT-4 generated error messages outperformed conventional compiler error messages in only 1 of the 6 tasks, measured by students' time-to-fix each problem. Handwritten explanations still outperform LLM and conventional error messages, both on objective and subjective measures.

Transformer architectures contribute to managing long-term dependencies for Natural Language Processing, representing one of the most recent changes in the field. These architectures are the basis of the innovative, cutting-edge Large Language Models (LLMs) that have produced a huge buzz in several fields and industrial sectors, among the ones education stands out. Accordingly, these generative Artificial Intelligence-based solutions have directed the change in techniques and the evolution in educational methods and contents, along with network infrastructure, towards high-quality learning. Given the popularity of LLMs, this review seeks to provide a comprehensive overview of those solutions designed specifically to generate and evaluate educational materials and which involve students and teachers in their design or experimental plan. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review of educational applications (e.g., student assessment) of LLMs. As expected, the most common role of these systems is as virtual tutors for automatic question generation. Moreover, the most popular models are GTP-3 and BERT. However, due to the continuous launch of new generative models, new works are expected to be published shortly.

The advancement of natural language processing has paved the way for automated scoring systems in various languages, such as German (e.g., German BERT [G-BERT]). Automatically scoring written responses to science questions in German is a complex task and challenging for standard G-BERT as they lack contextual knowledge in the science domain and may be unaligned with student writing styles. This paper developed a contextualized German Science Education BERT (G-SciEdBERT), an innovative large language model tailored for scoring German-written responses to science tasks. Using G-BERT, we pre-trained G-SciEdBERT on a corpus of 50K German written science responses with 5M tokens to the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015. We fine-tuned G-SciEdBERT on 59 assessment items and examined the scoring accuracy. We then compared its performance with G-BERT. Our findings reveal a substantial improvement in scoring accuracy with G-SciEdBERT, demonstrating a 10% increase of quadratic weighted kappa compared to G-BERT (mean accuracy difference = 0.096, SD = 0.024). These insights underline the significance of specialized language models like G-SciEdBERT, which is trained to enhance the accuracy of automated scoring, offering a substantial contribution to the field of AI in education.

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Large Language Model (LLM)-based systems, in education has shown promise in enhancing teaching and learning experiences. However, the advent of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) like GPT-4 with vision (GPT-4V), capable of processing multimodal data including text, sound, and visual inputs, opens a new era of enriched, personalized, and interactive learning landscapes in education. Grounded in theory of multimedia learning, this paper explores the transformative role of MLLMs in central aspects of science education by presenting exemplary innovative learning scenarios. Possible applications for MLLMs could range from content creation to tailored support for learning, fostering competencies in scientific practices, and providing assessment and feedback. These scenarios are not limited to text-based and uni-modal formats but can be multimodal, increasing thus personalization, accessibility, and potential learning effectiveness. Besides many opportunities, challenges such as data protection and ethical considerations become more salient, calling for robust frameworks to ensure responsible integration. This paper underscores the necessity for a balanced approach in implementing MLLMs, where the technology complements rather than supplants the educator's role, ensuring thus an effective and ethical use of AI in science education. It calls for further research to explore the nuanced implications of MLLMs on the evolving role of educators and to extend the discourse beyond science education to other disciplines. Through the exploration of potentials, challenges, and future implications, we aim to contribute to a preliminary understanding of the transformative trajectory of MLLMs in science education and beyond.

This study explores the efficacy of a multi-perspective hybrid neural network (HNN) for scoring student responses in science education with an analytic rubric. We compared the accuracy of the HNN model with four ML approaches (BERT, AACR, Naive Bayes, and Logistic Regression). The results have shown that HHN achieved 8%, 3%, 1%, and 0.12% higher accuracy than Naive Bayes, Logistic Regression, AACR, and BERT, respectively, for five scoring aspects (p<0.001). The overall HNN's perceived accuracy (M = 96.23%, SD = 1.45%) is comparable to the (training and inference) expensive BERT model's accuracy (M = 96.12%, SD = 1.52%). We also have observed that HNN is x2 more efficient in training and inferencing than BERT and has comparable efficiency to the lightweight but less accurate Naive Bayes model. Our study confirmed the accuracy and efficiency of using HNN to score students' science writing automatically.

This study highlights the potential of fine-tuned ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) for automatically scoring student written constructed responses using example assessment tasks in science education. Recent studies on OpenAI's generative model GPT-3.5 proved its superiority in predicting the natural language with high accuracy and human-like responses. GPT-3.5 has been trained over enormous online language materials such as journals and Wikipedia; therefore, more than direct usage of pre-trained GPT-3.5 is required for automatic scoring as students utilize a different language than trained material. These imply that a domain-specific model, fine-tuned over data for specific tasks, can enhance model performance. In this study, we fine-tuned GPT-3.5 on six assessment tasks with a diverse dataset of middle-school and high-school student responses and expert scoring. The six tasks comprise two multi-label and four multi-class assessment tasks. We compare the performance of fine-tuned GPT-3.5 with the fine-tuned state-of-the-art Google's generated language model, BERT. The results show that in-domain training corpora constructed from science questions and responses for BERT achieved average accuracy = 0.838, SD = 0.069. GPT-3.5 shows a remarkable average increase (9.1%) in automatic scoring accuracy (mean = 9.15, SD = 0.042) for the six tasks, p =0.001 < 0.05. Specifically, for multi-label tasks (item 1 with 5 labels; item 2 with 10 labels), GPT-3.5 achieved significantly higher scoring accuracy than BERT across all the labels, with the second item achieving a 7.1% increase. The average scoring increase for the four multi-class items for GPT-3.5 was 10.6% compared to BERT. Our study confirmed the effectiveness of fine-tuned GPT-3.5 for automatic scoring of student responses on domain-specific data in education with high accuracy. We have released fine-tuned models for public use and community engagement.

This research aims to demonstrate that AI can function not only as a tool for learning, but also as an intelligent agent with which humans can engage in collaborative learning (CL) to change epistemic practices in science classrooms. We adopted a design and development research approach, following the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) model, to prototype a tangible instructional system called Collaborative Learning with AI Speakers (CLAIS). The CLAIS system is designed to have 3-4 human learners join an AI speaker to form a small group, where humans and AI are considered as peers participating in the Jigsaw learning process. The development was carried out using the NUGU AI speaker platform. The CLAIS system was successfully implemented in a Science Education course session with 15 pre-service elementary science teachers. The participants evaluated the CLAIS system through mixed methods surveys as teachers, learners, peers, and users. Quantitative data showed that the participants' Intelligent-Technological, Pedagogical, And Content Knowledge was significantly increased after the CLAIS session, the perception of the CLAIS learning experience was positive, the peer assessment on AI speakers and human peers was different, and the user experience was ambivalent. Qualitative data showed that the participants anticipated future changes in the epistemic process in science classrooms, while acknowledging technical issues such as speech recognition performance and response latency. This study highlights the potential of Human-AI Collaboration for knowledge co-construction in authentic classroom settings and exemplify how AI could shape the future landscape of epistemic practices in the classroom.