Kevin C. Haudek

Prudence Djagba, Kevin Haudek, Clare G. C. Franovic et al.

Automated scoring of students' scientific explanations offers the potential for immediate, accurate feedback, yet class imbalance in rubric categories particularly those capturing advanced reasoning remains a challenge. This study investigates augmentation strategies to improve transformer-based text classification of student responses to a physical science assessment based on an NGSS-aligned learning progression. The dataset consists of 1,466 high school responses scored on 11 binary-coded analytic categories. This rubric identifies six important components including scientific ideas needed for a complete explanation along with five common incomplete or inaccurate ideas. Using SciBERT as a baseline, we applied fine-tuning and test these augmentation strategies: (1) GPT-4--generated synthetic responses, (2) EASE, a word-level extraction and filtering approach, and (3) ALP (Augmentation using Lexicalized Probabilistic context-free grammar) phrase-level extraction. While fine-tuning SciBERT improved recall over baseline, augmentation substantially enhanced performance, with GPT data boosting both precision and recall, and ALP achieving perfect precision, recall, and F1 scores across most severe imbalanced categories (5,6,7 and 9). Across all rubric categories EASE augmentation substantially increased alignment with human scoring for both scientific ideas (Categories 1--6) and inaccurate ideas (Categories 7--11). We compared different augmentation strategies to a traditional oversampling method (SMOTE) in an effort to avoid overfitting and retain novice-level data critical for learning progression alignment. Findings demonstrate that targeted augmentation can address severe imbalance while preserving conceptual coverage, offering a scalable solution for automated learning progression-aligned scoring in science education.

Yucheng Chu, Hang Li, Kaiqi Yang et al.

Automated assessment of open-ended student responses is a critical capability for scaling personalized feedback in education. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in grading tasks via in-context learning (ICL), their reliability is heavily dependent on the selection of few-shot exemplars and the construction of high-quality rationales. Standard retrieval methods typically select examples based on semantic similarity, which often fails to capture subtle decision boundaries required for rubric adherence. Furthermore, manually crafting the expert rationales needed to guide these models can be a significant bottleneck. To address these limitations, we introduce GUIDE (Grading Using Iteratively Designed Exemplars), a framework that reframes exemplar selection and refinement in automated grading as a boundary-focused optimization problem. GUIDE operates on a continuous loop of selection and refinement, employing novel contrastive operators to identify "boundary pairs" that are semantically similar but possess different grades. We enhance exemplars by generating discriminative rationales that explicitly articulate why a response receives a specific score to the exclusion of adjacent grades. Extensive experiments across datasets in physics, chemistry, and pedagogical content knowledge demonstrate that GUIDE significantly outperforms standard retrieval baselines. By focusing the model's attention on the precise edges of rubric, our approach shows exceptionally robust gains on borderline cases and improved rubric adherence. GUIDE paves the way for trusted, scalable assessment systems that align closely with human pedagogical standards.

Leonora Kaldaras, Tingting Li, Prudence Djagba et al.

Learning Progressions (LPs) can help adjust instruction to individual learners needs if the LPs reflect diverse ways of thinking about a construct being measured, and if the LP-aligned assessments meaningfully measure this diversity. The process of doing science is inherently multi-modal with scientists utilizing drawings, writing and other modalities to explain phenomena. Thus, fostering deep science understanding requires supporting students in using multiple modalities when explaining phenomena. We build on a validated NGSS-aligned multi-modal LP reflecting diverse ways of modeling and explaining electrostatic phenomena and associated assessments. We focus on students modeling, an essential practice for building a deep science understanding. Supporting culturally and linguistically diverse students in building modeling skills provides them with an alternative mode of communicating their understanding, essential for equitable science assessment. Machine learning (ML) has been used to score open-ended modeling tasks (e.g., drawings), and short text-based constructed scientific explanations, both of which are time-consuming to score. We use ML to evaluate LP-aligned scientific models and the accompanying short text-based explanations reflecting multi-modal understanding of electrical interactions in high school Physical Science. We show how LP guides the design of personalized ML-driven feedback grounded in the diversity of student thinking on both assessment modes.