Zero-Shot Vision-Language Models for Classroom Engagement Recognition: A Benchmark Study of Prompt Sensitivity and Cross-Dataset Generalization
On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → Prompt learning and adaptation of CLIP
Abstract (arXiv)
Automated classroom engagement recognition holds substantial promise for scalable learning analytics, yet the suitability of modern Vision-Language Models (VLMs) for this task under zero-shot conditions remains largely unexplored. We present a systematic benchmark that evaluates five widely-used VLMs: CLIP, BLIP-VQA, GPT-4o, LLaVA-1.5-7B, and Qwen2.5VL-7B-Instruct across two complementary educational datasets: DAiSEE, an individual-student video dataset (300 sampled test clips), and the Student Classroom Behaviour dataset (SCB, 1,168 scene-level images). Each model is probed with three prompt variants spanning minimal, rubric-anchored, and chain-of-thought designs. Our experiments reveal three primary failure modes of zero-shot VLMs for engagement recognition: (1) near-random performance on individual students, with Cohen's kappa never exceeding 0.10 on DAiSEE; (2) severe class collapse, where models assign 85-100% of predictions to a single engagement level regardless of visual content; and (3) extreme prompt sensitivity, with accuracy swings of up to 32 percentage points on identical images depending solely on prompt phrasing. Remarkably, scene-level classification on SCB is substantially more tractable: CLIP and GPT-4o achieve kappa approximately 0.60 when prompted with behaviorally-grounded rubrics. We also document a practical barrier for deployment: GPT-4o's safety filters reject 98% of chain-of-thought requests involving individual student faces. Our findings provide a calibrated baseline and surface critical design considerations for the use of VLMs in educational observation systems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt learning and adaptation of CLIP, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 11 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Jun 2026.
Builds on
11 of 22 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 10
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2023Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 7,869
- 2025Qwen2.5-VL Technical Reportcited by 5,587
- 2022BLIP: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training for Unified Vision-Language Understanding and Generationcited by 4,322
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,392
- 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,135
- 2016DAiSEE: Towards User Engagement Recognition in the Wildcited by 39
- 2018Prediction and Localization of Student Engagement in the Wildcited by 33
- 2021Improving state-of-the-art in Detecting Student Engagement with Resnet and TCN Hybrid Networkcited by 22
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Context Matters: Peer-Aware Student Behavioral Engagement Measurement via VLM Action Parsing and LLM Sequence Classification
- 2025Vision Large Language Models Are Good Noise Handlers in Engagement Analysis
- 2025Exploring Automated Recognition of Instructional Activity and Discourse from Multimodal Classroom Data
- 2026Leveraging Vision-Language Models to Detect Attention in Educational Videos
- 2025Using Vision Language Models to Detect Students' Academic Emotion through Facial Expressions
- 2025When Better Teachers Don't Make Better Students: Revisiting Knowledge Distillation for CLIP Models in VQA
- 2026The Professor: Multi-Teacher Unsupervised Prompt Distillation for Vision-Language Models
- 2022VL-Taboo: An Analysis of Attribute-based Zero-shot Capabilities of Vision-Language Models