Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Generating Feedback-Ladders for Logical Errors in Programming using Large Language Models

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 2405.00302 v3 pith:BNU2LMAK submitted 2024-05-01 cs.CL

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

In feedback generation for logical errors in programming assignments, large language model (LLM)-based methods have shown great promise. These methods ask the LLM to generate feedback given the problem statement and a student's (buggy) submission. There are several issues with these types of methods. First, the generated feedback messages are often too direct in revealing the error in the submission and thus diminish valuable opportunities for the student to learn. Second, they do not consider the student's learning context, i.e., their previous submissions, current knowledge, etc. Third, they are not layered since existing methods use a single, shared prompt for all student submissions. In this paper, we explore using LLMs to generate a "feedback-ladder", i.e., multiple levels of feedback for the same problem-submission pair. We evaluate the quality of the generated feedback-ladder via a user study with students, educators, and researchers. We have observed diminishing effectiveness for higher-level feedback and higher-scoring submissions overall in the study. In practice, our method enables teachers to select an appropriate level of feedback to show to a student based on their personal learning context, or in a progressive manner to go more detailed if a higher-level feedback fails to correct the student's error.

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. Exploring LLM-Generated Feedback for Economics Essays: How Teaching Assistants Evaluate and Envision Its Use

    cs.HC 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In a think-aloud study, five economics teaching assistants found AI-generated essay feedback useful as suggestions, especially when it included highlighted evidence and intermediate judgments.

Pith tools