REVIEW 4 cited by
Bridging the Novice-Expert Gap via Models of Decision-Making: A Case Study on Remediating Math Mistakes
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
read the original abstract
Scaling high-quality tutoring remains a major challenge in education. Due to growing demand, many platforms employ novice tutors who, unlike experienced educators, struggle to address student mistakes and thus fail to seize prime learning opportunities. Our work explores the potential of large language models (LLMs) to close the novice-expert knowledge gap in remediating math mistakes. We contribute Bridge, a method that uses cognitive task analysis to translate an expert's latent thought process into a decision-making model for remediation. This involves an expert identifying (A) the student's error, (B) a remediation strategy, and (C) their intention before generating a response. We construct a dataset of 700 real tutoring conversations, annotated by experts with their decisions. We evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs on our dataset and find that the expert's decision-making model is critical for LLMs to close the gap: responses from GPT4 with expert decisions (e.g., "simplify the problem") are +76% more preferred than without. Additionally, context-sensitive decisions are critical to closing pedagogical gaps: random decisions decrease GPT4's response quality by -97% than expert decisions. Our work shows the potential of embedding expert thought processes in LLM generations to enhance their capability to bridge novice-expert knowledge gaps. Our dataset and code can be found at: \url{https://github.com/rosewang2008/bridge}.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
When Models Know More Than They Can Explain: Quantifying Knowledge Transfer in Human-AI Collaboration
Model benchmark performance only weakly predicts how well people learn from AI explanations, with notable outliers across code and math.
-
IDEAlign: Comparing Large Language Models to Human Experts in Open-ended Interpretive Annotations
IDEAlign uses a pick-the-odd-one-out triplet task to measure idea-level similarity between LLMs and expert human annotations, and shows LLM judges using this protocol outperform lexical and vector-based baselines.
-
Intent Matters: Enhancing AI Tutoring with Fine-Grained Pedagogical Intent Annotation
Fine-tuning a math tutor model on 11 fine-grained pedagogical intents instead of 4 broad ones gave better automatic scores and a modest human preference in a small evaluation.
-
SingaKids: A Multilingual Multimodal Dialogic Tutor for Language Learning
The paper presents SingaKids, a four-language dialogic tutoring system, and reports component-level improvements plus a 35-student pilot study of its scaffolding behavior.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.