CLAIFeb 6, 2024

Large Language Models As MOOCs Graders

arXiv:2402.03776v47 citationsh-index: 8
Originality Incremental advance
AI Analysis

This addresses the challenge of scalable and reliable assessment in MOOCs, offering a potential automation solution, though it is incremental as it builds on existing LLM and prompting techniques.

The study tackled the problem of unreliable peer grading in MOOCs by testing large language models (GPT-4 and GPT-3.5) as graders, finding that a zero-shot chain-of-thought prompt with instructor-provided answers and rubrics produced grades more aligned with instructors than peer grading.

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) unlock the doors to free education for anyone around the globe with access to a computer and the internet. Despite this democratization of learning, the massive enrollment in these courses means it is almost impossible for one instructor to assess every student's writing assignment. As a result, peer grading, often guided by a straightforward rubric, is the method of choice. While convenient, peer grading often falls short in terms of reliability and validity. In this study, using 18 distinct settings, we explore the feasibility of leveraging large language models (LLMs) to replace peer grading in MOOCs. Specifically, we focus on two state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4 and GPT-3.5, across three distinct courses: Introductory Astronomy, Astrobiology, and the History and Philosophy of Astronomy. To instruct LLMs, we use three different prompts based on a variant of the zero-shot chain-of-thought (Zero-shot-CoT) prompting technique: Zero-shot-CoT combined with instructor-provided correct answers; Zero-shot-CoT in conjunction with both instructor-formulated answers and rubrics; and Zero-shot-CoT with instructor-offered correct answers and LLM-generated rubrics. Our results show that Zero-shot-CoT, when integrated with instructor-provided answers and rubrics, produces grades that are more aligned with those assigned by instructors compared to peer grading. However, the History and Philosophy of Astronomy course proves to be more challenging in terms of grading as opposed to other courses. Finally, our study reveals a promising direction for automating grading systems for MOOCs, especially in subjects with well-defined rubrics.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes