Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Exploring LLM Prompting Strategies for Joint Essay Scoring and Feedback Generation

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 2404.15845 v1 pith:ZUJ3OBBG submitted 2024-04-24 cs.CL

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

Individual feedback can help students improve their essay writing skills. However, the manual effort required to provide such feedback limits individualization in practice. Automatically-generated essay feedback may serve as an alternative to guide students at their own pace, convenience, and desired frequency. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance in generating coherent and contextually relevant text. Yet, their ability to provide helpful essay feedback is unclear. This work explores several prompting strategies for LLM-based zero-shot and few-shot generation of essay feedback. Inspired by Chain-of-Thought prompting, we study how and to what extent automated essay scoring (AES) can benefit the quality of generated feedback. We evaluate both the AES performance that LLMs can achieve with prompting only and the helpfulness of the generated essay feedback. Our results suggest that tackling AES and feedback generation jointly improves AES performance. However, while our manual evaluation emphasizes the quality of the generated essay feedback, the impact of essay scoring on the generated feedback remains low ultimately.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. ELI-Why: Evaluating the Pedagogical Utility of Language Model Explanations

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ELI-Why shows GPT-4's grade-tailored explanations often miss the intended educational level and are less informative than human-curated explanations.

Pith tools