How Teachers Can Use Large Language Models and Bloom’s Taxonomy to Create Educational Quizzes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Question generation (QG) is a natural language processing task with an abundance of potential benefits and use cases in the educational domain. In order for this potential to be realized, QG systems must be designed and validated with pedagogical needs in mind. However, little research has assessed or designed QG approaches with the input of real teachers or students. This paper applies a large language model-based QG approach where questions are generated with learning goals derived from Bloom's taxonomy. The automatically generated questions are used in multiple experiments designed to assess how teachers use them in practice. The results demonstrate that teachers prefer to write quizzes with automatically generated questions, and that such quizzes have no loss in quality compared to handwritten versions. Further, several metrics indicate that automatically generated questions can even improve the quality of the quizzes created, showing the promise for large scale use of QG in the classroom setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it