Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

LLMs are Biased Teachers: Evaluating LLM Bias in Personalized Education

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 2410.14012 v2 pith:6RWH4ONZ submitted 2024-10-17 cs.CL cs.CY

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

With the increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) in education, concerns about inherent biases in these models have gained prominence. We evaluate LLMs for bias in the personalized educational setting, specifically focusing on the models' roles as "teachers." We reveal significant biases in how models generate and select educational content tailored to different demographic groups, including race, ethnicity, sex, gender, disability status, income, and national origin. We introduce and apply two bias score metrics--Mean Absolute Bias (MAB) and Maximum Difference Bias (MDB)--to analyze 9 open and closed state-of-the-art LLMs. Our experiments, which utilize over 17,000 educational explanations across multiple difficulty levels and topics, uncover that models potentially harm student learning by both perpetuating harmful stereotypes and reversing them. We find that bias is similar for all frontier models, with the highest MAB along income levels while MDB is highest relative to both income and disability status. For both metrics, we find the lowest bias exists for sex/gender and race/ethnicity.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. The Personalization Trap: How User Memory Alters Emotional Reasoning in LLMs

    cs.AI 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Adding user memory to LLMs degrades their emotional-intelligence test scores and systematically disadvantages marginalized user profiles.

  2. Evaluate Bias without Manual Test Sets: A Concept Representation Perspective for LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    BiasLens uses concept activation vectors and sparse autoencoders to estimate LLM bias from internal representations, reporting moderate to strong agreement with behavioral bias metrics in a small evaluation.

  3. Investigating Student Interaction Patterns with Large Language Model-Powered Course Assistants in Computer Science Courses

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A deployed LLM course assistant served 589 students across three CS courses; logs show heavy evening use and homework questions, while only about 11% of responses included AI follow-ups that students mostly ignored.

  4. The Scales of Justitia: A Comprehensive Survey on Safety Evaluation of LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A structured survey of LLM safety evaluation that proposes a why/what/where/how taxonomy and catalogs metrics, datasets, benchmarks, evaluators, and frameworks.

Pith tools