arXiv preprint ·
Evaluating LLM-Generated Feedback on Handwritten Mathematics: Feedback Quality and Subsequent Exam Performance
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
We evaluate the quality of feedback and practice exercises generated by GPT-5.1 from handwritten university mathematics answers and their grades, and examine whether receiving this feedback improves subsequent exam performance. We use six weekly bonus tests in an English (n=343) and a Dutch (n=236) cohort. Tests 1 and 3 used a crossover feedback design; otherwise, all attendees received feedback. To evaluate the feedback, six reviewers assessed 157 messages from three English-cohort tasks using six criteria scored from 0 to 3. The practice exercises received the highest proportion of strong ratings (95.5%), while diagnostic specificity (41.1%) and clarity and tone (33.4%) received fewer. Feedback for the lowest-scoring answers was rated as less actionable, suggesting that these students may need more targeted guidance from instructors. Comparisons of related exam questions showed mixed results, with no statistically significant differences after adjustment across four comparisons. Greater attendance and feedback exposure were associated with higher exam scores, but the contribution of feedback could not be separated from attendance and practice. Our findings show the potential of an integrated framework merging instructor guidance with automated feedback generation to provide personalised learning support at scale.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computers & Society
When LLMs Manipulate: Measuring Behavioral, Social, and Temporal Effects
From Canon to Nikon: Camera Domain Shift and Potential Equity Implications in Retinal AI
Two for One: Privileged Learning for Resource-Constrained Screening
The GenAI Who Knew Too Little: Revisiting Transactive Memory Systems in Human GenAI Collaboration
Situating Vulnerability: An Ethical Governance Framework for Anthropomorphic AI Interaction
Get the few papers worth your time in Computers & Society every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.