mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LLMs in the Classroom: Outcomes and Perceptions of Questions Written with the Aid of AI

arXiv 2503.18995 ↗First posted 23 Mar 2025cs.CY cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We randomly deploy questions constructed with and without use of the LLM tool and gauge the ability of the students to correctly answer, as well as their ability to correctly perceive the difference between human-authored and LLM-authored questions. In determining whether the questions written with the aid of ChatGPT were consistent with the instructor's questions and source text, we computed representative vectors of both the human and ChatGPT questions using SBERT and compared cosine similarity to the course textbook. A non-significant Mann-Whitney U test (z = 1.018, p = .309) suggests that students were unable to perceive whether questions were written with or without the aid of ChatGPT. However, student scores on LLM-authored questions were almost 9% lower (z = 2.702, p < .01). This result may indicate that either the AI questions were more difficult or that the students were more familiar with the instructor's style of questions. Overall, the study suggests that while there is potential for using LLM tools to aid in the construction of assessments, care must be taken to ensure that the questions are fair, well-composed, and relevant to the course material.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Mar 2025.

Builds on

2 of 12 references.

References · 2

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
  2. 2024Can Open-Source LLMs Compete with Commercial Models? Exploring the Few-Shot Performance of Current GPT Models in Biomedical Taskscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3.

3 papers.