How Can I Improve? Using GPT to Highlight the Desired and Undesired Parts of Open-ended Responses
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automated explanatory feedback systems play a crucial role in facilitating learning for a large cohort of learners by offering feedback that incorporates explanations, significantly enhancing the learning process. However, delivering such explanatory feedback in real-time poses challenges, particularly when high classification accuracy for domain-specific, nuanced responses is essential. Our study leverages the capabilities of large language models, specifically Generative Pre-Trained Transformers (GPT), to explore a sequence labeling approach focused on identifying components of desired and less desired praise for providing explanatory feedback within a tutor training dataset. Our aim is to equip tutors with actionable, explanatory feedback during online training lessons. To investigate the potential of GPT models for providing the explanatory feedback, we employed two commonly-used approaches: prompting and fine-tuning. To quantify the quality of highlighted praise components identified by GPT models, we introduced a Modified Intersection over Union (M-IoU) score. Our findings demonstrate that: (1) the M-IoU score effectively correlates with human judgment in evaluating sequence quality; (2) using two-shot prompting on GPT-3.5 resulted in decent performance in recognizing effort-based (M-IoU of 0.46) and outcome-based praise (M-IoU of 0.68); and (3) our optimally fine-tuned GPT-3.5 model achieved M-IoU scores of 0.64 for effort-based praise and 0.84 for outcome-based praise, aligning with the satisfaction levels evaluated by human coders. Our results show promise for using GPT models to provide feedback that focuses on specific elements in their open-ended responses that are desirable or could use improvement.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2024.
Builds on
15 of 55 references.
References · 15
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
- 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,020
- 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 408
- 2018A Survey on Deep Learning for Named Entity Recognitioncited by 281
- 2023A Survey of GPT-3 Family Large Language Models Including ChatGPT and GPT-4cited by 81
- 2023Fine-tuning ChatGPT for Automatic Scoringcited by 50
- 2023Automated Distractor and Feedback Generation for Math Multiple-choice Questions via In-context Learningcited by 24
- 2024Improving Assessment of Tutoring Practices using Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 11
- 2022AUC Maximization for Low-Resource Named Entity Recognitioncited by 6
- 2023Using Large Language Models to Provide Explanatory Feedback to Human Tutorscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 4; 2026: 3.
10 papers.
- 2025Can Large Language Models Match Tutoring System Adaptivity? A Benchmarking Studycited by 17
- 2024How Can I Get It Right? Using GPT to Rephrase Incorrect Trainee Responsescited by 12
- 2024Does Multiple Choice Have a Future in the Age of Generative AI? A Posttest-only RCTcited by 7
- 2025Enhancing the De-identification of Personally Identifiable Information in Educational Datacited by 7
- 2024Do Tutors Learn from Equity Training and Can Generative AI Assess It?cited by 5
- 2025LLM-Generated Feedback Supports Learning If Learners Choose to Use Itcited by 4
- 2026LLM Prompt Evaluation for Educational Applicationscited by 1
- 2025Examining GPT's Capability to Generate and Map Course Concepts and Their Relationshipcited by 0
- 2026Chat-Based Support Alone May Not Be Enough: Comparing Conversational and Embedded LLM Feedback for Mathematical Proof Learningcited by 0
- 2026AI-Driven Assessment of Human Tutors: Linking Training Performance to Real-Life Practicecited by 0
- 2026AI-Driven Assessment of Human Tutors: Linking Training Performance to Real-Life Practice17 Jun 2026
- 2026Chat-Based Support Alone May Not Be Enough: Comparing Conversational and Embedded LLM Feedback for Mathematical Proof Learning21 Feb 2026
- 2026LLM Prompt Evaluation for Educational Applications22 Jan 2026
- 2025LLM-Generated Feedback Supports Learning If Learners Choose to Use It20 Jun 2025
- 2025Examining GPT's Capability to Generate and Map Course Concepts and Their Relationship11 Apr 2025
- 2025Can Large Language Models Match Tutoring System Adaptivity? A Benchmarking Study7 Apr 2025
- 2025Enhancing the De-identification of Personally Identifiable Information in Educational Data14 Jan 2025
- 2024Do Tutors Learn from Equity Training and Can Generative AI Assess It?15 Dec 2024
- 2024Does Multiple Choice Have a Future in the Age of Generative AI? A Posttest-only RCT13 Dec 2024
- 2024How Can I Get It Right? Using GPT to Rephrase Incorrect Trainee Responses2 May 2024