Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Is ChatGPT a Good Teacher Coach? Measuring Zero-Shot Performance For Scoring and Providing Actionable Insights on Classroom Instruction

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2306.03090 v1 pith:7QZHMSQ7 submitted 2023-06-05 cs.CL cs.AI

Is ChatGPT a Good Teacher Coach? Measuring Zero-Shot Performance For Scoring and Providing Actionable Insights on Classroom Instruction

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords teacherclassroomteacherschatgptcoachcoachingexpertfeedback
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Coaching, which involves classroom observation and expert feedback, is a widespread and fundamental part of teacher training. However, the majority of teachers do not have access to consistent, high quality coaching due to limited resources and access to expertise. We explore whether generative AI could become a cost-effective complement to expert feedback by serving as an automated teacher coach. In doing so, we propose three teacher coaching tasks for generative AI: (A) scoring transcript segments based on classroom observation instruments, (B) identifying highlights and missed opportunities for good instructional strategies, and (C) providing actionable suggestions for eliciting more student reasoning. We recruit expert math teachers to evaluate the zero-shot performance of ChatGPT on each of these tasks for elementary math classroom transcripts. Our results reveal that ChatGPT generates responses that are relevant to improving instruction, but they are often not novel or insightful. For example, 82% of the model's suggestions point to places in the transcript where the teacher is already implementing that suggestion. Our work highlights the challenges of producing insightful, novel and truthful feedback for teachers while paving the way for future research to address these obstacles and improve the capacity of generative AI to coach teachers.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Mitigating LLM biases toward spurious social contexts using direct preference optimization

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Debiasing-DPO reduces bias to spurious social contexts by 84% and improves predictive accuracy by 52% on average for LLMs evaluating U.S. classroom transcripts.

  2. Creating and Evaluating K-12 GenAI Assessment Graders Through Context Engineering

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    LLM graders achieve substantial human agreement on math and science MCAS items but vary on ELA, performing best as sources of formative narrative feedback rather than summative numerical scores.

  3. Enhancing Instructional Quality: Leveraging Computer-Assisted Textual Analysis to Generate In-Depth Insights from Educational Artifacts

    cs.AI 2024-03 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    AI and NLP applied to educational artifacts within the Instructional Core Framework can identify advantages for teacher coaching, student support, and personalized learning.